The essence of "loving one line and doing one line" is the orientation of choosing a job before employment; The essence of "doing a job and loving a job" is the requirement of working attitude after employment.
The whole argument of the opposing side is about today's society, and many job seekers can't choose their favorite industries. However, this does not contradict our values of encouraging people to pursue hard and make themselves competent in their favorite industries. For example, in an era when you want to be a slave but can't, you have been a slave for a while. Does this mean that you can't pursue freedom when you are a slave? It is precisely because people love and pursue freedom that the new China is born!
Therefore, having no choice or being forced is not a reason to stop us from advocating "loving one line and doing another". On the contrary, advocating "love one line, do one line" can make us turn the pressure of reality into the driving force of pursuit, instead of becoming slaves to work under the pressure of reality.
First, a "people-oriented" society cannot but consider people's happiness. The ultimate goal of economic development is to make people happy. If social progress is achieved by countless people who have no choice but to be forced, then this progress will lose its meaning.
Second, it is easier for people to get happiness by doing what they love, and it is easier to stimulate their enthusiasm for work and create social wealth. Beethoven loved music and became a musician, Darwin loved biology and put forward the theory of evolution, and Wang Jinxi loved the cause and fought for it all his life. [Note: The case should be made on site]
Third, advocating "love and do" is also a requirement for society. Society can't always put people in a situation where they have no choice. "Love a line and do a line" is precisely to highlight people's right to choose freely and is an important link to promote people's free and all-round development.
In addition to opposing reality and ideals, the other side's argument has the following mistakes [selection]:
1, the essence of positive debate is: what kind of attitude to face the work after entering the business. However, before entering the business, what kind of attitude to choose a job is beyond the reach of a positive outlook.
2. The implied logic of the opponent's debater is to equate "loving one line and doing another" with "not loving one line and not doing it". However, we advocate falling in love before getting married, which does not mean that we can't get married without falling in love.
They equate doing your job well with loving it. Being a typist, for example, doesn't mean loving typing.
They say that love is changeable, so do you agree to do a job, and you can love today but not tomorrow?
5. The other party argues that it is capable, but "loving a line" does not mean that the work of "this line" will hit you, but it requires you to accumulate strength to pursue it. For example, Tai Lihua, who is deaf in both ears, performed the miracle of Guanyin with thousands of hands, and made extraordinary efforts from not hearing music to being able to ichalky.