For the text "Persuade to Learn", we now generally think that the full text is divided into two parts. The first part focuses on the importance of learning, and the second part focuses on learning methods.

This is more practical than simply saying "the article discusses the importance of learning". However, when talking about the argument structure of the article, we will still say that "this article puts forward the central argument' insufficient study'", and then demonstrate it from three aspects to encourage people to study hard.

The first paragraph demonstrates the significance of learning; The second paragraph demonstrates the role of learning; The third paragraph demonstrates from the aspect of learning attitude. The reason for this contradiction is that we are bound by a theory that an argumentative essay must have a central argument and only one central argument.

In fact, an argumentative essay can have two arguments, or even multiple arguments, which is often the case in argumentative essays that express opinions from all aspects around a thing. If we accept this, we will accept the reality of the article and ourselves, and we will not feel at a loss when analyzing many argumentative papers-we will lose ourselves first, and then lose the text, leaving only teaching reference.

If we study this article carefully according to our ideas and the information we get from it, we will get the following results:

The article begins with a quotation from a gentleman. In modern Chinese, "can't learn" means "can't give up learning", which implies "you are already learning". The gentleman who is already studying has realized the benefits of learning, so he said this sentence. Note that Xunzi divided people into three categories: scholars, gentlemen and saints. It is learning that turns people from "scholars" into "saints". "Gentleman" has begun to learn, but has not yet learned the highest realm.

Why can't you give up studying? The article goes on to say that the benefits of learning experienced by gentlemen are "ice" first, followed by "green" and "wood", which is said to have been improved under certain circumstances. After three "improvements" in a row, the benefits of learning naturally arise: "A gentleman has knowledge and saves himself, so he knows the reason without fault", which is simply "learning improves a gentleman".

In connection, the center of the first paragraph is not that the gentleman said "you can't learn", but that the gentleman said this sentence, that is, the last sentence explained that "learning has improved the gentleman." The previous words "ice", "green", "wood" and "gold" are the basis and arguments for introducing "learning to be an official"

Learning has such an effect on "gentlemen", but what about ordinary "scholars"? Behind the original text are these sentences:

So, if you don't climb the mountain, you don't know the height of the sky. Don't face the deep stream, I don't know the thickness of the ground; You didn't know the greatness of learning until you heard the last words of the late king. The son of a foreigner is born with the same sound, long and different customs, so it is natural to teach him.

Obviously, learning has the same effect on ordinary people. If they don't realize this, it's because "I didn't know great learning until I heard the last sentence of my late king".

In a word, learning has great benefits. This paragraph can be summarized as "learning can improve people".

The original text quotes from the Book of Songs again, ending with "God is greater than Buddha, and joy is greater than harmlessness". This passage shows that everyone has a desire to improve themselves. So the general argument of the last article (not the full text)-"to learn" has become a natural conclusion. It can be expressed by logical syllogism structure: learning can improve people, and people should improve, so people should learn.

However, the way to improve people is not only to learn, but also to think. But learning is much more effective than this.

This is what the author later said, "I have been thinking all day, so it is not as good as what I learned in an instant." In this case, learning is naturally the first choice for promoting people. So the second paragraph of this sentence still proves "to learn".

In order to make readers understand and believe this sentence, the author quoted several examples from Random Thoughts. Say "climb high and look far", "follow the wind", "fake horse" and "fake boat", and finally directly explain the truth that "good fake is worse than things". What we often say today is "learning makes us stand on the shoulders of our predecessors", which means "learning is good for things and false".

It should be noted that Xunzi's "learning" and "thinking" have special meanings. His "learning" is not limited to books, but widely studies the experience of predecessors; Its "thinking" refers to personal meditation. Xunzi's "learning" did not exclude general thinking.

The text then discusses three small arguments from "accumulation of soil makes a mountain" to "anxiety" in turn: "learning must be diligent in accumulation to achieve the goal", "learning must be persistent to achieve the goal" and "learning must be committed to achieving the goal". Obviously, this is not a question of "whether to learn", but a question of "how to learn". The text does not integrate these three small arguments into a general argument, but the author has done this work, and you will know from the original text:

Therefore, people with ulterior motives have no bright future; Without enlightenment, there would be no hehe works. Those who take the main road are not allowed to make trouble with the two kings. You can't see with both eyes and listen with both ears. Snakes have no feet to fly, but mice have no skills. The poem says: "The dead pigeon is in mulberry, and its son is seven. A gentleman is a scholar, and his instrument is one. His musical instrument is one of them. His heart is like a knot. " Therefore,

The author integrates the three requirements of learning into "one thing at a time", which means: concentrate on learning and keep learning. When analyzing the article, we use the previous argument as our general argument, not because we don't understand the article, but because we are bound by the incorrect central argument theory.

In fact, the original text also puts forward other views on "how to learn" (juxtaposed with "being trapped in one middle school"), including "choosing a good environment for learning", because a good environment will promote and help people learn well. The author's words are "living in the hometown, walking in the soil" and "learning should pay attention to their own behavior", because bad things tend to focus on themselves when they are not performing well. I won't say much about these.