No matter how different the specific content of the first part of the opening report is, it inherently points to the problems that researchers should study. The so-called problems to be studied are problems that exist in theory or practice but have not been studied or studied thoroughly, which mainly refer to the following three aspects: ① new problems that have not been recognized or discovered at all in existing research; (2) The existing research has not used or used mature perspectives and methods; (3) The researcher intuitively foresees a possible new viewpoint (equivalent to a research hypothesis).

Problems and problems are interrelated, and researchers can generate new problems from other people's problems. Therefore, researchers must study related literature (including literature review or literature review, hereinafter referred to as literature research) to find out the problems studied. Of course, literature research can be a grasp of the current research situation, but it is easy to mislead researchers. It seems that it is enough to know the current research situation in this field, but it is not entirely true, because the problem has always been formed by history. If you don't grasp the history of the development of the problem, it is not only difficult to understand the problem currently being studied, but more importantly, you can't perceive the development trend of the problem. If we don't take the development trend of the problem as the premise, we can't ask questions with cutting-edge significance. Emphasis on grasping the current research situation, in a great sense, is because the current research literature implies the history of the formation and development of research problems. In fact, many research documents will more or less briefly describe the problem and its history in the preface. If researchers can realize this, they can trace the history of the formation and development of the problem, which creates a foundation for approaching the forefront. Of course, the approach close to the frontier cannot be supported by the inter-annual research documents. If researchers focus on cutting-edge problems (or think that the questions raised are new), they can't help but bring the formation history of the problems into their own field of vision. It can be seen that historical consciousness is very important for researchers. Of course, another reason for emphasizing the research status quo is that researchers do not want to pay attention to new problems, but seek solutions to problems that have become * * * knowledge, and their focus has shifted to the research of methods. At this time, it is not appropriate to state the history of the problem at length.

square