Explain the relationship between quantitative change and qualitative change (there must be innovation)

Boiling water is a qualitative change that water can never drink, and it is a quantitative change from cold to hot.

When this quantity changes to a certain extent, a qualitative change takes place.

"Fools eat cake" and "Fools eat salt"

There are two stories in The Analects of Confucius, a Buddhist literary work: One is "Fools Eat Salt", which tells that there was once a fool who went to other people's house to eat vegetables, but it was boring. After the owner knew it, he added a little salt to it, which made it delicious. Then he thought, it tastes good because of the salt. A little salt will be delicious. Wouldn't it be better to add more? So he ate a lot of salt, and the result was bitter and astringent. The other book is "Fools Eat Cakes", which tells that once a person was hungry and wolfed down a piece of cake. He doesn't feel full. He ate five cakes in a row, but he was still not full. So he ate the seventh cake, and just halfway through, he felt full. Men regret it very much and think; I'm full today, because I ate this half cake, and all the six I ate before were wasted. If I had known that I would be full after eating this half cake, I would have eaten this half cake first.

Of course, these two stories are jokes, and people will never do such stupid things again, but the philosophy contained in them will always inspire people. The protagonists of these two stories both made the same mistake, namely metaphysics. Specifically, "fools eat salt" does not understand that people should eat salt in moderation. A certain amount of salt will make food taste delicious, but if it is excessive, it will become bitter. Although "fools eat cakes" and "fools eat salt" are different, they don't understand that quantitative change will cause qualitative change to a certain extent. His mind is full of cakes. In itself, it is the accumulation process of the amount of cakes eaten bite by bite. Eating enough is not only the function of the second half of the cake, but the function of all the cakes eaten. The second half of the cake is just the joint point from quantitative change to qualitative change. He doesn't understand this, just like "fools eat salt", he only sees one aspect of qualitative change and quantitative change, which separates the dialectical relationship between them. They only emphasize and see quantitative changes without qualitative changes; On the other hand, only recognizing the qualitative change, but not seeing the quantitative change, is a metaphysics that separates the dialectical relationship between quantitative change and qualitative change. This way of thinking is extremely harmful in our actual work and life.

Tian Ji horse racing

During the Warring States Period, Qi Weiwang and Tian Ji competed for horses, and each had three horses, namely, upper, middle and lower horses. During the race, mount, mount and dismount. Because Qi Weiwang's refusal was better than Tian Ji's, Tian Ji lost three out of three.

Tian Ji's good friend, Sun Bin, the descendant of Sun Wu, a famous strategist, knew about it, helped him out with a good idea, and invited Qi Weiwang to have a competition again. The game has started again. At this time, Tian Ji's bad horse played against Qi Weiwang's bad horse, resulting in two wins and one loss. This time, Tian Ji won.

This story contains the philosophical truth of qualitative change due to the different spatial arrangement order of components. Materialist dialectics holds that the qualitative change of things is a leap from one qualitative state to another, and it is a change in the fundamental nature of things. Tian Ji adopted Sun Bin's opinion, and the horse was still the original horse, but the "arrangement order" of the horse racing with the other side was changed, so it changed from losing to winning. This enlightens us that to make things qualitatively better, we should not only pay attention to the accumulation of quantity, but also grasp the change of "spatial structure form" in order to win.

"Valley Heap Theory" and "Baldness Theory"

From the 5th century BC to the 4th century BC, the ancient Greek sophist Aubrey and others put forward the following philosophical topics: Can a millet form a pile of millet? Won't a hair go bald? This is the interesting "Gudui Theory" and "Baldness Theory" in ancient western philosophy. The specific content of the "grain pile theory" is that one grain cannot form a grain pile, and one grain cannot form a grain pile. If one grain is added at a time, and each grain can't form a grain pile, how can a grain pile be formed? "Baldness theory" holds that losing one hair can't make you bald, and losing another hair can't make you bald, so if you lose one hair at a time and every hair you lose can't make you bald, then why can you form baldness?

Obviously, the above two statements are inconsistent with the facts. Although this view is not easy to put forward the contradiction between quantitative change and qualitative change and its transformation in that era when productivity, technology and human thinking level are low, it is of progressive significance. However, the argument itself is wrong and sophistical. Why do you say that? Changes in the quantity of things will inevitably lead to qualitative changes to a certain extent. Although there are not many "one", the constant repetition or accumulation of "one" will form a transformation to many. Obviously, Aubrey's argument splits the dialectical relationship between quantitative change and qualitative change. He only saw "one", only saw the increase of "one" in the grain pile or the decrease of "one" in his hair, but did not see that the continuous increase or decrease of "one" would change in the opposite direction. From the perspective of contradiction, the grain pile is made up of grains, which is the inevitable result of the transformation from the contradiction of "one" to the contradiction of "many"; The formation of baldness is caused by the continuous reduction of a hair, which is the inevitable result of the contradiction from "more" to "one". It is the transformation of contradictions in the process of quantitative change, and it is the transformation of status, function and nature of contradictions caused by quantitative change.

This sophistry mistake of thousands of years ago will not be repeated today. However, there are similar methodological mistakes. This should attract our attention.

Insist on the right of

How do people find the transparency and mellow of wine from the white of rice, the red of sorghum and the purple of grapes?

Legend: Two people met a fairy by chance. The gods taught them how to make wine and told them to choose the rice that Duanyang had eaten that day. When the ice and snow first melted, the water from the mountain spring was blended, poured into a pottery urn made of Millennium purple sand soil in a deep and lonely place, and then covered tightly with a new lotus that saw the sunrise in early summer, and sealed it for 49 days until the cock crowed three times.

Like every legendary hero, they went through all kinds of hardships, found all the materials, reconciled and sealed their dreams together, and then waited for that moment with great concentration. What a long wait! On the forty-ninth day, they stayed up all night, waiting for the cock to crow. In the distance, there was the first cock crow, and after a long time, there was the second cock crow. When will the third cock crow come? One of them can't stand it anymore. He opened the clay pot and was surprised. The water inside is as sour as vinegar. The big mistake has been made and cannot be redeemed. He spilled air on the ground in disappointment.

The other one, though unable to help but want to reach out, gritted his teeth and insisted on crowing three times. What a sweet and mellow wine! I just waited a little longer. From then on, the difference between "wine" and "sprinkling" is in the seemingly ordinary horizontal.

Many winners, unlike losers, are often not opportunities or smarter minds, but just because winners persist for a moment-sometimes a year, sometimes a day, sometimes just a crow.

The story of Bernard Shaw

The great English writer is brilliant, but he is thin and not handsome. A beautiful actress, who likes his talent very much, wrote to propose to him. The letter reads: "Dear Mr. Bernard Shaw, if we get married and give birth to a child as smart as you and as beautiful as me, then we will be the happiest people in the world. ..... "But Bernard Shaw had no feelings for the actress, so he wrote back a letter to her according to the actress's thinking:" Dear lady, this is absolutely impossible. If children are as ugly as me and as stupid as you, aren't we the most unfortunate people in the world? " This short story embodies the philosophical theory that the composition of things has changed in structure and arrangement order, and it can also cause qualitative change.