These days, everyone is about to become a "wall of grass"

What happens when a person only sees "right and wrong" and ignores "cause and effect"?

He will be repeatedly slapped in the face.

This article has only one point of view: to evaluate one thing, a person, do not only start from a single factor, otherwise it will make you narrow.

01

The outbreak of the epidemic has caused various magical phenomena to emerge in an endless stream.

Yesterday, I saw Raislin from "Writing a Story for You" and Ah Chan from "Maybe", and at the same time published an article targeting Trump's calling the "virus" a "Chinese virus", and the two articles expressed The attitude is actually very worthy of scrutiny.

I know @Achan was 4 years ago and Raislin was 3 years ago, but reading Achan is far less than Raislindo.

These two self-media authors are considered prominent figures in the official account. Their fans are at least one million, and I happen to be a subscriber of the two. In this way, I am also a "fan" of the two big coffees.

First of all, I declare that the views of the two articles have their own reasons, and I will not be biased towards either side, but the feelings conveyed to the readers behind the articles are completely different, and this feeling can affect a person's "emotion", to put it bluntly One magnifies the contradiction to the reader, and the other uses a very rational narrative method to make the reader feel calm after reading it.

Next, I will disassemble it for you to compare, and you can also experience the feelings that different articles convey to readers.

Let's take a look at the "title" first:

Which headline motivates you more to click and retweet? Obviously the first sentence. Why?

Because the first sentence is a "declarative sentence", it cannot even be called a title in the strict sense, while the second title, is a phrase.

The first title uses very emotional words "one bite", "really", "disgusting", the second title is very calm, you can't see any subjective emotional expression and position of the author in the title.

But there is no doubt that from the perspective of communication, the first headline is obviously easier to get "clicks", "exposure", and "communication", and even for most people who don't like to think, they don't need to read the article. Look at the title and turn it up first, why?

Because this sentence directly aroused everyone's "anger" and clearly divided the positions of China and the United States, as an aspiring young man, how could he not scold Trump? ? ? In addition, the big Vs speak like this, and forwarding is necessary.

Let's briefly look at the content of the article:

Some excerpts from "A Chan":

👉Original link

Some excerpts from "Raislin":

👉Original link

Sure enough, the number of readings and the "good-looking" data immediately reflect the real situation.

Achan was defeated.

I am not targeting any title, but what I want to say is that a title can often reflect something, and the content I have selected can be viewed through the link in front of me to avoid understanding "out of context".

After reading the two articles, my feelings are completely different.

One article instantly ignited my hatred and hatred of Trump, and I felt that I would become a slave to my emotions, while the other article caused me to think about the current events, and my mind instantly became very clear and calm.

Obviously, these two articles are both for the analysis of the same event, and they both express their opinions, so why do people feel so different?

To be honest, if there are "right" or "wrong" evaluation criteria to read two articles, I guess Achan will definitely be sprayed badly. Because in the eyes of many people, he still seems to be justifying his vindictiveness, even though he has mentioned the fact that Trump is indeed using "racism", but the point he puts forward must be something people don't want to see, even if it is Makes sense.

There is an article about Ah Chan, "Zhang Xiaolong and Ma Huateng both reward Ah Chan who is 'maybe', why?" which introduces his background in detail.

Ah Chan, Cantonese, 1987. In April 2007, he started the original blog "Maybe", focusing on Internet culture and products. For 10 years, participated in the establishment of the well-known entrepreneurial community "Geek Park"

You may not know that "Maybe" has its own independent blog, but this blog requires scientific access to read. Since Google announced that its search business would withdraw from China in 2010, Uncle Chan, who has been vocal for freedom of information, wrote a blog post that day in solidarity. The number of readings has soared to 20W. About 4 hours after the release, the domain name may be blocked and cannot be accessed normally in mainland China.

The reason why I prefer Ah Chan's writing is probably the rigor and impartiality revealed in his writing, which has been influencing me all the time. This sense of responsibility through words is worth learning by everyone who makes content.

Really valuable content doesn't just use the "emotional" part of "human nature."

Really valuable content will not only attempt to manipulate the "emotions" of the public.

When you're reading something, ask yourself how you feel after reading it. Is it angry, sad, happy, sad, depressed?

Sometimes I watch some movies, and I will have a lot of emotions, but I will have strong reflections at the same time. I will think, why did the protagonist of the story make such a choice? If it were me, what would I do?

Even I will be vigilant and warn myself not to make mistakes like the protagonist. Even more will not use their own emotions to guide and force others to keep the same thoughts as me.

02

In the past two days, the topic of "patriotism" has been discussed with great enthusiasm.

The day before yesterday, the Latin American Nobel laureate was designated as China's enemy due to inappropriate remarks, which led to the complete removal of the "works" of this Latin American author. But as a reader, it is undeniable that his works are extremely wonderful and wonderful, but people can no longer see these, but everything that is not conducive to "correct" should be criticized and strangled.

I really liked what my teacher said at the time—

"He's my favorite writer" doesn't mean "everything he says is correct." From the perspective of literary works, Llosa's creation is undoubtedly a treasure.

So how can one evaluate a person from a single factor?

Yesterday, in the Qiu Chen incident, the "Hong Kong independence" remarks from a few years ago were dug up by others, and they were directly "whiplashed", "reported", "criticized", and acted as a reasonable and honorable act of self-righteousness. Everyone seems to have forgotten Qiu Chen's positive influence over the past few years, and the comments below are even more shocking and rude.

A few days ago, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television issued a "restricted membership" order. Chinese actors who have entered foreign countries will be restricted from filming film, television dramas and variety shows in mainland China. ,

The text states:

Bottom comment:

Investor Xifeng previously analyzed the proposal of Academician Li Lanjuan in the article "How to Look at Academician Li Lanjuan's Suggestions on Controlling the Remuneration of Celebrities and Improving the Treatment of Scientific Researchers" .

Point out the difficulties behind the idea to implement, as well as the aspects that the idea does not take into account.

Many people only see stars with bright heads, but they don't see migrant workers who are still struggling to survive with lunch boxes.

On another level, he mentioned that "it is the capital that decides where to go, not the capitalist. It is the capital that wants to increase in value, not the capitalist. If the capitalist does not meet the demands of the capital, the capital will abandon him in minutes."

I will not comment on this "one-pot" approach, because "foreigners" will be restricted, so maybe the stars who were born abroad since childhood, such as Wang Leehom, Wilber Pan, and Stefanie Sun, are ignored. Where are they born and where they are educated, is it their own choice?

In addition, whether their music and film works have a positive impact on the public, it seems that these are no longer considered within the scope? Just because of a "foreign status", it is necessary to bear such a heavy price?

And the voice in the comment section below is really chilling. When did we become so "thin" and "narrow" to evaluate a person and a work?

03

A while ago, I published on Zhihu and Weibo, "China Will Become a Country of Immigrants? Talking about the Regulations on Permanent Residence of Foreigners , there is no doubt that 80% of the comment area is full of swearing.

I won’t talk about Weibo, I never knew that the violent attackers in Zhihu are far more than I imagined. Originally, my position in this article is not to stand for “support” and “opposition”, but to hope that it is not to talk about” "Good" and "Bad"

Here is part of my article:

Then, 90% of the voices in the comment area are taking a stand, and even forcibly using "identity" to try to "kidnap" my point of view. To be honest, when I saw the girl's words, I instantly felt a trance that traveled through time and space, although I I haven't experienced the era of "criticism", but my grandfather, an educated intellectual, had a sign on his chest, knelt on the ground at his age, and was criticized in public.

It's just that in this era, with the "safe" protection net of the Internet, at least one can avoid "physical" attacks, but what about people's minds? Progress or regress? What is the measure of "blocking people's wisdom" and "opening people's wisdom"? Anyway, I know it's definitely not by forcibly eliminating the different sounds.

In addition, it is rare to see a rational friend expressing a similar opinion in the comment area, so I was immediately attacked by others in the comment area. To be honest, I can understand his experience and psychology very well. Everyone’s starting point and intention are the same. Okay, but in the so-called only support "correct", as long as there are any potential factors that touch their interests, they would rather "overall veto".

Getting support is really easy these days. As long as you take a clear stand and stick a big "patriotic" label on your chest and pick some loopholes to enlarge it is enough. But let me ask, who doesn't love the country? Does not support and impartiality mean "unpatriotic"?

Is this different from the fake space that was "resolutely boycotting Japanese products" back then?

Liushen Leilei talked about his student days in the article "My Fool's Era" a while ago:

When we assembled one afternoon, the head teacher suddenly looked solemn and said to us: A major incident happened. Two civil airliners hit the World Trade Center in New York.

Everyone cheered and applauded enthusiastically. I also cheered and applauded inside.

He said that when he read Les Misérables, he began to understand Hugo's saying that, above the absolutely right revolution, there is the absolutely right humanism.

Jin Yong once commented on Dickens' "A Christmas Carol", saying that "this is a great book written by a great and gentle heart". That's how I felt when I came across Les Miserables. This is also a great book written by a great and warm heart.

In the past, I didn't even know what "greatness" and "kindness" were.

Similarly, in this era, it seems that people's hostility is getting heavier and heavier, only taking a stand, but ignoring "humanism".

Look at my title, it's not a title, it's a statement.

Maybe you don't think you are the "wallgrass" in my mouth, but unfortunately, in fact, all of us may become "wallgrass", but we are complacent without knowing it.

Finally, a quote from Ding Taisheng's Weibo:

The more people who pursue consistency with the group, the easier it is to become hostile to people who are different. The more independent people are, the more they can tolerate different people, and the more they can seek common ground while reserving differences, except for those who become stupid by pursuing consistency with the group.

Also, look at the title again, and think if your first reaction when you see the title is approval? Of course there are objections. But if you agree, you might as well review your past and present thinking if there is any inconsistent behavior.

If you want to master more ways of thinking, efficiency tools, efficient learning, productivity laws, and sideline thinking , welcome to join my "knowledge planet" or "wisdom chat" community

Note: The community has thresholds. If you trust and like my content, welcome to join, talk directly to me and ask me questions at any time, thank you for your support.

Welfare: After sorting out some community content, WeChat public account (Fan Misuo) will reply "214" in the background to get a copy of "Daily Group Essence" (with 2020 Oscar film resources/Science Climbing Tool/Druker information, thank you to everyone in the group) Friends strongly support)

Weibo: Slash Girl Fan Misuo "Content that may surprise you"