Tan's enlightening exposition on wisdom and learning, wisdom and articles, compared with Cao Xueqin's words.
Conclusion 1: Learning is not necessarily wisdom. Real learning must be the crystallization of wisdom.
Mendel studied the mating experiment of beans, which is the most routine knowledge of biologists, but biologists before Mendel have done this experiment thousands of times, but only Mendel discovered the basic principles of genetics. Darwin, Einstein and Mendel all found extraordinary wisdom from convention and could see wisdom that others could not see.
Judgment 2: True wisdom must be based on learning. Otherwise it's just a flash in the pan. Wisdom is not groundless. "I've been thinking all day, but I'd better learn it in an instant." Sporadic wisdom, such as sparks, is not enough.
Conclusion 3: There are two kinds of articles and books-smart and not smart. Therefore, reading also needs wisdom, that is, to distinguish the value of articles and books, to "have room for reading" and not to "work in vain."
In an era when the Internet is the carrier and massive information is pouring in, how to distinguish between good books and good articles with true knowledge and wisdom has given birth to a different problem. At the same time, this is also an era of self-media, which brings unexpected convenience to writing and publishing articles, and it is cost-free.
In this way, the network is inevitably mixed, and mud and sand are everywhere. This is also a necessary price. Lack of information, closure, monopoly and artificial manipulation have always been harmful.
I am looking for an article on the Internet, based on Luo Jialun's "Learning from Time" and taking "learning from time to time, you must understand human feelings" as the standard. You will definitely ask, "Do you have the wisdom to tell whether knowledge is true or false?" . Hehe, it's good to recognize the world and cultivate human feelings. The key is whether you have true temperament and compassion. Grasping this point is not as good as the rest.