Who can tell me who is more suitable to be the opponent in the dispute over the Minister of Education, Confucius or Zhuangzi? What should I say? The opponent thinks that Zhuangzi is suitable to be the Minister of Education. When we get an argument, we first examine it, that is, analyze and define the Ministry of Education: the department in charge of education and language work in the State Council. The minister of education should choose an expert who is competent in education and language work. Then, we can see that both Confucius and Zhuangzi are thoughtful, but Zhuangzi is not only a thinker, but also a writer. His fluent and clear grammar has influenced a large number of later generations' writing styles. Zhuangzi is not only regarded as a work of thought and philosophy, but also regarded as a treasure because of its literary value. Emperor Xuanzong of the Tang Dynasty called Zhuangzi the Southern Classic of China. Xuanzong was brilliant. He read countless books of poetry, but he found that Zhuangzi was different, which showed Zhuangzi's literary level. Confucius, on the other hand, wrote poems, books, rituals and music all his life just to express Confucius' thoughts, without mentioning his literary efforts. The language of The Analects can be said to be brilliant, but it is a pity that Confucius did not write it himself. So we can see that Zhuangzi is an expert in language and writing compared with Confucius. Confucius and Zhuangzi are not great in personality and thought. So whose personality is more suitable to be the Minister of Education? First, as the minister of education, we must make reasonable decisions, which is the basis for the efficient operation of all systems. We know that people's judgment under interests is easily influenced. Historically, Confucius spent his whole life traveling for an official position, but Zhuangzi refused to go into politics, which reflected their ideological differences here. Zhuangzi advocates inaction, that is, putting down fame and fortune and "standing in the ring", that is, looking at things objectively. Confucius once said: "Rich and expensive, people want what they want; If you don't take this road, you will accomplish nothing. Poverty and meanness are disgusting to people; If you don't take the main road, you won't go. " "Money is available, although there are many whips, I can do it. If you can't get it, just do as I say. " Undoubtedly, it shows his inner recognition and affirmation of pursuing fame and profit. In the era of Confucius, he could pursue fame and gain without losing his moral integrity. However, in modern society, there are more and more interference factors and the interest relationship is more and more complicated. I am afraid it is difficult for fame and fortune to make a fair decision. In contrast, Zhuangzi, who does not seek fame and fortune and advocates objectivity, is of course more conducive to making the most reasonable decision. Second, as a minister, of course, we should lead and organize subordinate departments and cooperate with other departments, but today's society is not bright. In order to achieve your goals, you often have to cooperate with people you don't like, and even your boss may be unbearable because of your values. What will happen to Confucius and Zhuangzi at this time? Confucius said, "If I treat others, who will ruin their reputation?" If you are famous, you have to try. Simin also, the reason why the three generations went straight. Laozi gave Confucius a word: "A wise man is dying, and an understanding person is also. Those who argue the broad masses are in danger, and those who are evil are also. A son should not have his own, and a minister should not have his own. "This is Lao Tzu's kind reminder to Confucius, and it also points out some shortcomings of Confucius, that is, he looks at the problem too deeply and speaks too sharply, hurting some people with positions and bringing great danger to himself. In contrast, Zhuangzi is keenly aware that people living in the world are like "swimming in unknown places", and there are dangers everywhere. He once said: "You don't know that there is a husband who cares for tigers! Dare not bring creatures, and be angry with them for killing them; Dare not take the whole thing as anger of its decision; When he is hungry, he will get angry. It is also appropriate for tigers to be different and flatter themselves; Therefore, its killer is also rebellious. " What's more, "if a husband loves a horse, he will hold an arrow in a basket and drown it with a dragonfly." There are mosquitoes and servants, and from time to time, lack of titles destroys the first broken chest. " And "people's hearts are more dangerous than mountains and rivers, and it is difficult to go to the sky. There is also a period of spring, summer, autumn and winter. "It can be seen that his understanding of officialdom is much more profound and accurate than that of Confucius, and because he is a human being, he will not cause others' unhappiness like Confucius' straight line. Thus, Zhuangzi knows how to survive in the sinister officialdom and how to get along with others to achieve his goal. Thirdly, Confucius advocated Xiu De, while Zhuangzi advocated conforming to human nature. Confucius' virtue and benevolence are still noble now, but what will happen in the future? Socrates asked the students, "Is it justice to kill people?" Answer: "injustice" and "what about killing prisoners?" "This is justice. "What seemed just at that time is now despised by morality. We can see that the progress of the times will inevitably lead to moral progress, and no matter how noble a person's moral outlook is, it is impossible to adapt to the development of the times forever. Adam Smith once said in "On Moral Sentiments": "The universal values of a group also affect and constitute the individual's moral sense", which tells us that the change of values will inevitably bring about changes in morality, benevolence and righteousness. Rousseau once said in On Social Contract: "You should listen to your conscience more than morality." This coincides with Zhuangzi's argument. If people listen to their nature (attention is nature, not instinct. Nature can refer to Adam Smith's definition, that is, worship and pursuit of good, disgust and abandonment of evil. ) Nature can maintain social harmony. Many of Confucius' arguments are very specific, which makes them obsolete soon. The nature advocated by Zhuangzi can change with the times, even in modern times. It can be seen that Zhuangzi's thought is more adaptable in education. Fourth, Confucius advocated benevolence and righteousness to intervene and judge things. Zhuangzi advocates inaction and objectivity. When Confucius became a minister, there must be two situations. First of all, Confucius wanted to change the relevant regulations. However, as we all know, the revision of a law is a headache, and the practices and practices that the whole system has adapted to for a long time will be affected. This change of Confucius will definitely cause instability. In history, Confucius suffered this kind of loss when he was the prime minister of the country, which directly led him to travel around the world. Secondly, Confucius not only changed the rules, but also violated them. Historically, Confucius was a man who ignored procedures and was used to judging things according to his preferences. He often does the next thing first, then considers modifying the rules, or even ignores them completely. This is because the benevolence and righteousness he advocated is subjective emotion, and it is of course short-term to measure objective things with subjective emotion. We might as well think about it. Two people apply for funding for similar reasons, but will Confucius get the same evaluation when he is happy and when he is unhappy? To say the least, even if Confucius can grasp this degree, what about his subordinates? Once you don't grasp it well, there will be injustice. Isn't this the taboo of today's civilization and rule of law? Zhuangzi's inaction can ensure the more stable operation of the old rules. Objectively, we can observe the whole system more rationally, which is more conducive to discovering shortcomings and realizing educational fairness and justice. To sum up, Zhuangzi is more suitable to be the Minister of Education. Since this is the first time to participate in the debate and I am a middle school student. Give some advice: first, dare to speak, speak loudly. The logic required by middle schools is not very great. In most cases, you can win by speaking up. Second, don't refute each other blindly, and talk about your own arguments whenever you have the opportunity. Because you argue that others are wrong, it does not mean that you are right, but if you are right, others must be wrong. Third, don't stare at your opponent in the debate, look at the audience and the judges more, so that they can resonate. Because your opponent will never agree with you, but your audience and judges can agree with you.