Some netizens said that my article lacked examples and even thought it was a serious problem. I wonder if they are still writing argumentative papers for the exam, so they should pay attention to arguments and so on. I think, if you don't have to accept dogmatic comments, you just have to write according to the logic of the article, so you don't have to worry about those boring and smelly rules. For a well-founded article, argument is much more important than proportion. If the viewpoint is novel and the argument is in place, even if there are no examples, it is still a good article. Just because an article has no examples doesn't mean that it can't find suitable examples. Maybe it's just that there are too many examples, too common. If a specific example is put forward, it will damage the universality of argument; If you add a few more complete supplements, it will make the article appear lengthy. Generally speaking, only when you find inspiring examples will you consider giving such examples, otherwise you can only add more words. In addition, please note that for a higher point of view, the low-level argument itself can be regarded as an example, or it may be called an abstract example. Some netizens said that my article lacked examples, which may only be confined to the level of concrete common sense, while ignoring the abstract examples here. My articles are generally tall. If we want to trace back to specific common sense, the front will be longer, the article will be unnecessarily wordy, and even there will be faults. For such a high-viewpoint article, it is naturally best to find vivid and typical examples, but we should not ask too much of them. After all, most of them are only individual cases, and more abstract examples are needed. Dogmatists ask middle school students to give simple examples, probably because they don't need to write articles with high opinions. Dogmatists ask middle school students to give examples, which can not only explain things vividly, but also be objective, and will not make arguments become pure sophistry. I will not talk about the realistic servility of this view here, but point out that such objectivity is only an illusion. In fact, the examples cited in writing articles are all beneficial to their own arguments, and they always unconsciously ignore those counterexamples, resulting in the illusion that everything is like this. For example, when we talk about the harm of internet addiction, we always say that some students delay their studies because they are addicted to the internet, but they ignore the ideological enlightenment of the internet to others. For those students who are addicted to the internet, the deeper reason may be their disappointment with our education and society. It can be seen that examples can not only explain the problem, but also cover it up. Examples are not necessary for authors, especially those who can put forward high opinions, but our readers can test their understanding by trying to give appropriate examples. Interested readers may wish to have a look. How many examples have I given in this article, and how many are so-called abstract examples? The composition of the college entrance examination is really harmful. Please read the blog post: How did the composition of the college entrance examination become a draft activity?