How important is "being able to speak" and "being able to think"?

I have been taught since I was a child to "be obedient", "be able to speak", "be observant" and "be smart"... However, I probably only achieved the first point. Therefore, I am accustomed to the current mechanical teaching, listening to others' blind indoctrination, and not very willing to use my own brain to think. But gradually I discovered the disadvantages of this: being confined to a space set by others, like a frog at the bottom of a well, knowing nothing about the world outside the well.

But forget about the purity of ignorance, at least you won’t notice it. It's not pure, which is very frustrating. After realizing this, I wanted to change something. When encountering certain things, I want to think independently and express my own opinions. However, I have been closed off for too long and I no longer know how to express myself clearly to express what I want to say clearly. So I started observing and learning.

I used to be very afraid of debates and speeches, which allow many people to listen to my speech. I felt that it would be embarrassing if I couldn’t speak well, that my words would not be recognized by others, and that I would forget my words... No matter what They will make many excuses for themselves to avoid trying. But after several forced attempts, I unexpectedly found that I didn’t seem to be that resistant, and my performance didn’t seem that bad. At least someone applauded me—although it was out of politeness.

A point made by the teacher is still fresh in my memory: "Any analogy is an inappropriate analogy." However, "But without analogy, no problem can be explained." With this understanding, I went to watch many debate competitions and watched the debaters quarrel. It seemed that I could form my own judgment without being carried away. I felt that what he and she said were reasonable. When facing attacks, use analogies to resolve them; when facing defenses, use analogies to resolve them. This seems like a good approach.

When it comes to social tools these days, most people talk about Weibo. Weibo is a very magical place, like a small society, where you can experience all kinds of warmth and warmth of human nature. It is also a window through which we little people see the world. Through it, we can see the big and small things happening all over the world. The most exciting thing is that we can participate and comment on it. Since the number of Weibo users is extremely large, there will always be big differences in the evaluation of a news event. At this time, we are confused.

Speaking of the role of Weibo, another point is to subtly change our outlook. To be precise, it is the role of the “majority” opinion leaders that we cannot see. There is nothing serious about saying that. I often see various events on Weibo. Due to the incorrect language organization of the blogger, the normal development trend is lost after the communication effect is amplified. Many melon-eating people have no ability to judge. They just think what most people think. This is what we call the bandwagon effect. Over time, our three views have become the same as those of "most people".

Instead of talking about the Internet, let’s talk about things around us.

When we communicate with others, sometimes conflicts inevitably arise. This is because we are always blindly defending ourselves, thinking that what we say is right, and neglecting to judge whether there is anything wrong with the other party's language. In this case, it is better to start with the other party and make him less firm in his point of view, so as to penetrate your own thoughts little by little. This is much more effective.

But sometimes the other person’s point of view is not wrong, but it will lead people in the wrong direction. So some rumors just appeared and were widely spread.

So why is Moments the birthplace of rumors? Why do parents easily believe those rumors? Why don't they believe our explanation? It is easy to understand when you think about the limitations of WeChat Moments and the thinking characteristics of middle-aged and elderly people.

Since WeChat is relatively closed, the circle of friends are all friends around you. Birds of a feather flock together, and people flock together. It can be said that the circle of friends is full of people who hold similar ideas. As a result, no one stands up to question, criticize or even report wrong information, because everyone thinks it is "right and reasonable." The middle-aged and elderly people are now in a period of gradually withdrawing from the trend of the times and focusing on health and wellness. They are more concerned about similar information. Once they obtain it, they will believe it and follow it and spread it widely. At this time, the superiority of Weibo over Moments is also reflected: openness.

Although the information I read is very messy, it is at least comprehensive. Rumors have a very low survival rate in an environment like Weibo.

We often see and take it for granted and think it makes sense. In fact, if we think about it carefully, we will find that there is a problem. An example given by the teacher is that there is a saying that "moderate drinking is good for health." When I hear it, I feel like "Wow, that's right, that's right. Moderate drinking is good for health. You can't stop me from drinking." But. Behind this sentence, there is a problem of inversion of cause and effect. Because people who can drink moderately generally have a better living situation and do not need to drink for social entertainment for a living, but only drink in their spare time. And such people themselves are relatively healthy. Therefore, if it is said that moderate drinking contributes to good health, the cause and effect is reversed. The same goes for promoting cosmetics, saying that high-end cosmetics make people's skin good. But those who can afford high-end cosmetics are generally relatively wealthy, have a good family and working environment, eat well, drink well, and have good skin. So this is also a problem of inversion of cause and effect.

The teacher also talked about the importance of thinking from another perspective. When faced with the same problem, the answers from different perspectives are completely different. For example, when Wu Song fights tigers, everyone is accustomed to stand in Wu Song's perspective and feel that he has eliminated harm for the people. But from the tiger's perspective, it has formed a potential tacit understanding with the local people. If you don't offend me, I won't offend you. But then a man suddenly appeared and broke into my territory and beat me to death. I felt aggrieved. Thinking about it this way, the feeling of Wu Song fighting a tiger is completely different.

However, I thought about another question, can people really fully empathize with others?

I think it’s not possible. People can never jump out of their own thinking limitations. Even if you think you have jumped out, the scope you jump to is still your cognitive circle. In the same way, empathy cannot be truly accomplished. You can't completely understand the other person's thinking, because everyone's experience and environment are unique and different from the other person.

You think you are looking at this issue from his perspective, but in fact that is still the case. Be in your awareness. It is to imagine his thinking through your own thinking, and then look at the problem you are looking at from the way you imagine his thinking. The result is not much different. For example, you grew up in a superior family environment and have never been short of money. But the other person has lived in poverty since he was a child, and money is his biggest desire. At this time, when you encounter money problems, it is difficult for you to realize the importance of money to him. Even if you stand from his perspective, you still cannot get a comprehensive understanding.

But this does not mean that empathy is not important. If we really go to black in one direction, then the world will only be "black or white." Baidu Encyclopedia’s definition of “perspective thinking” is as follows: Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes is a way of thinking about dealing with interpersonal relationships that puts you in others’ shoes, that is, thinks about what others think and puts understanding first. People must understand and trust each other, and learn to think from other people's perspective. This is the basis of communication between people: tolerate and understand each other, and think from others' perspective.

The key word is "understanding". If you can’t fully understand, then try to understand. It is enough to observe everything around you carefully without limiting yourself to thinking entirely about yourself.

This sentence "As long as you are happy" is very considerate literally. I will consider you. No matter what you do, as long as you are happy, I will not interfere at all. But why does it sound vaguely wrong?

If you think about it carefully, this sentence may also contain several other meanings in certain situations, such as "it's up to you", "I'm too lazy to tell you", "I can't control you"... ...The reason why people listen to anger is that the "disdain" it brings becomes the trigger. For example, when two people are quarreling, one party says to the other, "As long as you are happy," it seems to mean that I am not wrong and I am just giving in to you. This will of course make the other party angry. In debates, this has almost become an extremely unreasonable sure-fire move: the other party quotes dozens of scriptures and speaks eloquently. And your "As long as you are happy" is like forcing steamed buns into the other person's mouth without giving him any water.

Or in other situations, the speaker does not have any negative emotions, but is full of joy.

For example, if a boyfriend agrees to any unreasonable demands of his girlfriend and says "As long as you are happy" when asked about it - then I will be happy too. This is great, but if you say it in the wrong tone, it is very likely that the woman will feel that she is not taken seriously, and the other party will no longer want to talk to you.

So in summary, saying this sentence is an extremely test of emotional intelligence.

Being a "thinking" and "speaking" person is probably my lifelong pursuit. I'm still on the road, still moving forward.