Thoughts#
If someone gives you a sum of money to do business, even if they say to split the profits and that losses are on them, and they do not participate in the management. If they know nothing about this business, unless there is a strong trust between you, any doubt will bring significant risks to the business.
Even if a written agreement is made in advance, the best outcome can only ensure that you do not suffer legal losses, but your relationship is likely to break down.
If there is no written agreement, the risk will be the highest.
Lack of Empathy#
Some people have very poor empathy or lack rationality.
They cannot understand that what they like is detested by others; what they avoid is eagerly pursued by others; the same temperature that feels unbearably hot to them might feel just right to someone else.
They will think others have problems or are being irrational.
If they can disregard others' feelings (which most people indeed do), they will directly impose their feelings on others, such as what food to eat, what color, style, or thickness of clothing to wear...
How to Prove Knowledge?#
How to prove knowledge?
For example, reading 100 books in a year, consistently reading for an hour every day for 300 days, and making a certain number of notes, you can see how well and neatly they take notes.
These can be pretentious; when they believe that others think these represent knowledge, they will fabricate.
Having read 100 books, yet not remembering anything afterward; reading for an hour every day without caring about quality, having no insights; taking great and neat notes, but all are just transporting others' thoughts.
Knowledge cannot be measured by these; so what should it be measured by?
His works and what he says, and it should be unrelated to interests.
But these can also be plagiarized, right? Just like answering questions. Although they have read these wise and novel ideas, they cannot understand or believe them, and will only trigger them in specific scenarios (like interviews or bragging), without applying them in real life, and they cannot propose new viewpoints or angles.
So if he can propose new viewpoints or angles, it can prove that he indeed has knowledge. But if he cannot prove it, it is just a matter of probability; I hope everyone will carefully infer and not dismiss it outright.
Below are my thoughts on whether various people understand, believe in, and practice a certain viewpoint.
The Choice of Truth, Goodness, and Beauty#
If I must discard one of these three, I would unhesitatingly discard goodness.
If I have to discard another, I might hesitate and fear, going through twists and turns, but in the end, I would still choose truth.
What if I discard truth as well? I might only be able to listen to "Erquan Yingyue" to get through the day; at that point, can I really consider myself alive? Is there any difference from a drunkard who drowns his sorrows in wine?
Is it Okay to Hit Children?#
It is okay to hit, but hitting can only serve as punishment for a child's wrong behavior; it cannot be an outlet for one's emotions and definitely cannot be due to differing opinions.
Opinions cannot be changed through hitting; they will only be hidden, which will inevitably create a rift.
When you do not understand a child, you cannot communicate on a spiritual level; there is only care in behavior and the transmission of emotions, nothing more. If you cannot control your emotions, I believe both of these have negative effects. In that case, how can we talk about education?
"Good children come from the stick," I believe this is a manifestation of one's own impotent rage, a reason to justify one's incompetence. Moreover, this is illogical; how can being abused lead to greater filial piety? Unless the two premises I mentioned above are added. However, he did not mention them, and those who know this saying do not know these two premises.
Sadly, there are indeed many parents who think this way.
Misguidance of Confucius#
"Do not impose on others what you do not desire," everyone has seen that this is not so easy to achieve. But I want to say, "What you desire for yourself, do not impose on others either." The standard for imposing on others is never oneself, but others; what truly matters is whether the other party wants it.
Do not force what others do not want; do not "bestow" upon others based on your feelings, and even expect gratitude in return.
My Ramblings, It's Okay if No One Reads#
I felt very sad today, partly due to the sorrow and regret of others not seeing through the world; I do not understand how they can so easily believe in one-sided words; do they have no discernment at all? Even in a situation like "Rashomon," where multiple parties confront each other, it does not necessarily reveal the truth, let alone that even the deceased can lie.
I adhere to two viewpoints: do not use vocabulary that others cannot understand to explain; only when others truly want to hear you speak can you speak; otherwise, you are just blind. It is not that I do not speak, but they do not want to listen, yet still ask what I think? I am simply not blind.
People only believe what they want to believe.
Therefore, one must be respectful before one can discuss the way; one must be articulate before one can discuss the principle; one must be agreeable before one can discuss the essence. Thus, one cannot engage in conversation without proper demeanor, which is called arrogance; one can engage in conversation but choose not to speak, which is called concealment; one can observe the demeanor without speaking, which is called blindness. — "Encouragement to Study" by Xunzi
Respectful demeanor, articulate speech, and agreeable attitude are merely superficial judgments of whether the other party truly wants to hear you speak; if you have already judged that the other party does not want to hear you (be careful of misjudgment), then even if there are these appearances, it is merely the other party respecting you; they still do not want to listen (in reality, almost no one can achieve this).
PS: If Song Yinye sees this, I would say my thoughts have diverged again.