Subjects for non-experimental purposes

Original link:

△ 228|Subjects for non-experimental purposes

The concept of the title is obviously invented by me, and it is similar to “non-first-person tragic story” , “the crime of creating conditions for others to commit suicide” and “no suicide pledge” .

As the name suggests, the non-experimental object is not intended for experimentation, but it must accept the rules of the experimental object. This is obviously a bit unreasonable, and even there is an inherent paradox, but in any case people have the fundamental right to explain it. Let me explain it in realistic terms, and you will instantly understand what is meant by a “non-experimental object”.

“First of all, I’m not targeting you, but many of your behaviors do have problems.” “I didn’t want to use these methods to test you, but I didn’t expect you to be deceived too easily.” “I didn’t, you think too much, I didn’t think that way at all, you think I’m like this and that’s it.”

Years ago, there was a foreign caricature that had almost no story, but depicted a kind of “delivery”. The boss scolded the employee, so the employee went home and scolded the wife, the wife scolded her child, and finally the child pointed at the cat in the corner and scolded the cat. Later, there were many versions of this story. For example, the cat went out to make trouble again and caused the scolding boss at the beginning to get stuck in a quagmire or was involved in a car accident. None of the people in the delivery were spared all the “victims”; After the cat escaped, the hostess went to the cat and ran into her husband’s boss, and they became lovers. As a result, there was a final “victim” in this transfer. The ending of this story can be interpreted in countless ways, but there is only one purpose – to find an ultimate “victim”.

When I was a student, I was a problem student with “I hit gongs in eight places in ten places, and I hit gongs in two places.” So according to the possible facts, I must be one of the first to be responsible for the scourge. I’m like a “scumbag”. It’s the man’s responsibility for a man to beat a woman. It’s the man’s responsibility for a woman to be a man. Who told him to do something that made a woman beat him? For me – it must be my responsibility to talk to people in class; it is my responsibility to talk to good students in class, because they are the good students I “seduce”; the “fan-absorbing area” sitting on the edge of the podium In a special position, although no one can talk to me, I sit in the front row, and I can see all the little things in the eyes of my classmates. As a result, my actions are like performing a pantomime for my classmates, causing everyone to be distracted. That’s me. Responsibility. Just like the “victim”, finding the ultimate “responsible person” is equally fun, but the way of inference is not to see who is the last one, but to see who is the first “perpetrator” in the causal chain.

There is also a case of finding a “non-experimental subject” in the middle section from Ying Qi. In the past, many people were obsessed with all kinds of relationship test questions because of “Will you cheat with me if we were not together and you met me? has been discussed in. Although the test questions can deduce an answer in a certain sense, the answer is not accurate, and it just makes the person who tests others feel at ease or anxious. However, it is inevitable that the test subjects will be alert during the test, whether they are being treated as a fool to complete some kind of emotional test. In this case, the experiment must be terminated in time, which is why the first “paradox” lines put the other party in the role of a “non-experimental subject”: I didn’t test you, I’m just wondering if this method will work.

The “victim” has to be pushed to the end, the “perpetrator” has to be traced back to the top, and the “subject of the non-experimental purpose” disconnects all possible positive and negative inferences between the “victim” and the “perpetrator” at the most important point. , the three of them are like the three elements of rock-paper-scissors, which check and balance each other, but they are indispensable. The “injurer” hurts the “victim”, but the status of the “victim” is deprived of the “subject of the non-experimental purpose”, but the “subject of the non-experimental purpose” means that they have created a new “The perpetrator”, if he hadn’t used this method to test the victim, how could he have created a “victim”?

For example: I saw evidence of your cheating on your phone, and you betrayed me; what do you mean, it makes sense for you to peek at my phone? What do you mean by distrusting me like this; what? Will I cheat if I don’t peek at your phone?

Or: I was angry because of the pressure from others, so I released the negative emotions caused by this pressure towards you, and just when you were about to resist, I said: I didn’t lose my temper, I was layered by layer by layer. The emotion was passed on, I just wanted to see if the stress would be passed on. Then you were blinded and felt like you were being played with, but I really didn’t take you as an experimental subject with “experimental purposes”. Then you start to lose your temper, and then I automatically become the victim, and then we start to pass the temper of internal friction until we can find a common object of venting.

Well, you can give the rest of the examples yourself. If you don’t give them, I can’t do anything about them. I’m just asking questions here and I’m too lazy to provide a solution for “the answer is hidden in the facts”.

I have added some “useless knowledge” to everyone, so next time I will create a new definition and apply it to new experimental subjects.

This article is reproduced from:
This site is for inclusion only, and the copyright belongs to the original author.

Leave a Comment