I’m a small-town problem solver.
Not technically a small town, of course, but third-tier cities in Henan are not much different.
I have been working conscientiously since I was a child. That’s my greatest strength. By doing, I was admitted to the university, and then step-by-step graduation, work, adjust circuit boards, programming, when the social livestock.
It’s hard work.
I have done so many years of paper, pile up can kill a strong man.
So what happened? Ding Zhen might as well smile in front of the camera. Ding Zhen can not even recite the periodic table of elements, but a big hit, with amazing traffic, hundreds of millions of hits, but also eat the imperial grain.
Do I have any idea about Ding Zhen?
I really have no idea.
Because I think I do the problem and Ding Zhen smile, it is two parallel worlds, there is no intersection.
Online have a similar with me “home to solve the problem. ”, said such a words:
A cold window in ten years is not as good as a reincarnated face. I am fluent in two languages, including an international lingua franca. I am even familiar with the principles of chemical engineering, biochemistry, organic and inorganic chemistry, even basic physics, pharmaceutical analysis, natural pharmaceutical chemistry and other disciplines. Preliminary understanding of advanced numbers, linear algebra, statistics and other glorious crystallization of human civilization. In terms of language, I am familiar with English and Chinese, and can skillfully use a large number of ancient poems and thousands of words. For a diploma, I stayed in the lab every week from 12 o ‘clock until 9 o ‘clock at night. In order to further my study, I insisted on memorizing English words every day, reading an English literature carefully every week, and occasionally doing a cet-6 reading comprehension and translation writing. However, these are not as good as a face.
In my opinion, this is a blind comparison.
Those of us who do problems should know one thing: Who are we competing with?
We are in competition with ordinary people like us.
We have too much specificity for each other. So it is very important to work hard. When you play games, I memorize two more words, and you fail me, and I have a better future than you, right?
But some of them are no competition at all.
For example, some people are born super smart, IQ 160, you work too hard to do the problem, people will look at it. This kind of person is not your competition.
Others were born artists, playing Bach at the age of four and composing piano music at six. I played the guitar in college for four years, but I didn’t play “Romance of love.” Who do I talk to?
Our principle of effort is useless to them.
Talent is like this, so is face.
Some people are amazing handsome boy, big beauty, not back the words not back formula, go there a station, show your hands and show your talent. In a normal society, such a person would be expected to live a lifetime with plenty to eat and drink.
Not only beautiful is so, cute is also so. Shirley Temple began acting at the age of six and became a Hollywood sensation. With what? With her hard work, honing her acting skills? Where can a six – year – old try so hard? It’s just naturally cute. It’s eye catching.
The same goes for luck.
Some people have no talent at all, the face looks like the nine cakes in the mahjong, the result somebody else bought a lottery win, 60 million. What do you do if you buy a fancy car and parade it in front of you?
What can be done?
Look at it.
That’s what a society should be.
People who are unique and different in any field should stand out.
How boring the world would be otherwise.
02
Someone put it to rise to the height of the jump the queue, said Ding Zhen “jump the queue ”.
Problem is the world’s resources are not line up for not “effort distribution ”.
Nor should it be.
A society in which people are queuing up to wait for a resource centre to allocate resources on some fixed principle is terrifying.
As the netizen complained: ten years cold window, as a reincarnated face.
But when we watch TV, when we watch videos, we focus on beautiful faces, attractive faces, and we don’t care if that face is familiar with chemical principles or biochemistry. It’s human biology to release dopamine at the sight of beautiful things. So what do you do?
In my opinion, there are only two solutions:
The first is through coercion. We’re not allowed to do this. We have to be managed.
The second is to make our attention worthless through economic means. Everyone watch your video, still make you a pauper!
In my opinion, both methods are terrible.
Although I also decade cold window, but I still would rather live in a “never back of the periodic table of elements Ding Zhen stronger than graduate students mix of absalom ” of the world, is not willing to live in that world.
I respect the value of hard work. I’ve tried hard over the years, but I respect the value of free choice more.
03
I say these truths, some net friends also understand actually. But they have two anger points that make them unwilling to listen to this explanation.
The first point of anger is about civil servants.
Ding Zhen were called for civil servants, “with the iron rice bowl ”, it was not happy, a lot of people think it unfair to have worked so hard to take an examination of civil service.
I was surprised at first by the accusation. In my opinion, With such a large flow of resources, Ding Zhen can bring huge economic benefits to the local area. Litang took advantage of him by recruiting him as a civil servant. Why does it seem to be Ding Zhen taking advantage now?
It was only later that I understood why we thought differently.
The key is the perception of civil servants.
In my mind, civil servant is a professional position, and the recruitment of civil servant is similar to the HR recruitment of large companies.
But in those people mind, civil servants belong to “the weapon of the ”. It is less like a job and more like a sacred public resource. Let ding zhen this web celebrity as a civil servant, it is a kind of indiscretion.
This kind of online cognition makes me a little uneasy. Of course, their perception might be more in line with social reality, but I would be even more upset if it were.
Another point of anger was an article in the China Youth Daily called “Why do the writers’ anger spread on Ding Zhen?”
It is true that the article is a bit frivolous, but there is nothing logically wrong with it. I’m also a small-town writer, and I read it without being offended. Even “language involved frivolous ” this one, also after complaints from you, only when I reread the notice.
Why do I feel differently than many Internet users?
I think carefully, or the identity of the newspaper recognition problem.
In my head, that’s an article. In a pluralistic world, of course, there are different standards of value. There is no problem with the topic, there is no problem with Ding Zhen, both sides can coexist. Some writers can’t stand Ding Zhen, then a newspaper to write an article to help Ding Zhen back, it seems to me there is no big problem.
But in many net friend’s eyes, this is a kind of official “qualitative ”. The media has a duty to guide public opinion and promote values; in other words, it has a duty to educate. So what it says is not just a question of right or wrong logic, nor is it a question of one person or one thing, but a question of where it wants to lead the people. Whether to deny “hard struggle ” values? Whether to encourage everyone to “opportunistic ” psychology? Is it to corrupt everyone’s morality?
You see, unexpectedly pull to the predecessors martyrs, someone even “could not help but worry this phenomenon may be shaken our rather ”, really I didn’t know the height of the completely.
Their sensitivity reflects my obtuseness.
Don’t look at these netizens lambasting China Youth Daily, in fact, it is far more important in their minds than in mine.
All I can say is this: this kind of online recognition makes me a little uneasy. If their perception is more in line with reality, that makes me even more upset.
04
I wrote this article, in fact, out of a sense of unease.
I find that a lot of people don’t really like diversity, don’t really like free choice. If you ask them, they say they like it, but they don’t really like it. They may want to limit the choices that others make once they don’t meet their expectations. They actually prefer to queue and allocate. They prefer a single ethic. They prefer normative things.
This tendency really scares me.
Recent Comments