Original link: http://weiwuhui.com/10662.html
Ye Tieqiao, the founder of Hedgehog Commune, came to my house a few days ago and recorded an audio program with me about the content industry.
Later, he basically didn’t make any deletions, and posted it on the audio platform of the small universe. If you are interested, you can search for “Old Zhefang Fan” (the name of this audio column). Brother Ye gave a title: “Dialogue with Wei Wuhui: In the content market, mediocre money drives out good money.”
A friend in the circle expressed his opinion on Yongbi Liangbi when reposting this program. The general meaning of this friend is that there is no objective standard for mediocre money and good money, only radish and green vegetables have their own preferences. There is a lot of mediocrity that cares about the meaning of one heart.
Brother Ye had another exchange with me regarding this friend’s evaluation.
I think there are still objective criteria for whether the content is good or bad. And above good, good, great, and excellent, there is no objective standard.
The objective standard is just ten words:
Facts have provenance and arguments have logic.
If you want to brag about the style, these ten words are very compelling.
This represents the two main lines of thought history after God died: empiricism (so-called facts) and rationalism (so-called logic).
Of course this is all bragging.
To put it more down-to-earth, you can’t make up (rumors), and you can’t talk nonsense (logical fallacies).
In terms of facts, I admit that no one can know everything, and the truth is actually very difficult, but at any rate, the facts you present always have a source, and they are not made up by yourself.
At the logical level, I have to start another paragraph.
As a teacher, I have asked in different classes (both undergraduate and master’s) which course the science of logic should be in primary and secondary education.
Only one class gave the correct answer: Chinese – most of the wrong answers were in mathematics.
However, what do we teach in our Chinese class?
The Chinese class likes to teach the central idea and the author’s intention. I still remember the article about Kong Yiji when I was a child, how the Chinese teacher tirelessly taught the difference between “feeling out” and “expelling”, and solemnly announced that this is a knowledge point for the exam, which must be kept in mind.
The structure should be big and small, which is the most important thing in the composition.
The Chinese class also likes to teach rhetorical techniques. When you see that Chinese people write things, they like to use parallel sentences very much. This is where the deep imprint lies. When the idiom is used, it is also a pair of pairs.
The writing style is beautiful and the rhetoric is gorgeous, which is also the top priority of the composition.
Therefore, every year in the composition of the college entrance examination, I play with these two things.
Think about it carefully, not all cool articles that are popular on the Internet are of this kind.
As for logic. . .
What is the logic?
As a liberal arts teacher in a university, I don’t know how many articles I’ve read, and I’ve read “because of this” cause and effect, and I’ve seen a landslide of “seeing the big from the small”. This is why I always have to repeatedly explain how much I value logic before assigning homework.
In fact, I have never understood why Chinese classes ignore logic.
A friend said some reasons why it is not convenient for me to write it out.
But let me say that we are still a socialist country with Marxism as the most important thought.
Marxism is of the vein of rationalism!
—— The first episode of pulling nitrogen ——
This article is transferred from: http://weiwuhui.com/10662.html
This site is only for collection, and the copyright belongs to the original author.