Let the author cry for a while first.
Let me introduce the background of the event first:
Recently, Zhang Kai, an associate professor at Wuhan University of Technology, set up an elective course called "Thinking and Strategies for Solving Problems". 1 1 lesson compares the cultural differences and thinking differences between the east and the west from many levels, and expounds a kind of thinking spirit, that is, to dare to deny authority and break the mindset of "being afraid of people" in China for thousands of years.
Teacher Zhang thinks we need to change this mentality. Because this blind belief in authority will constrain our freedom of thought, so that we are used to sticking to the rules and standing still. Especially in the garden of thought and truth, we should stay on a statue and dare not go any further. Even if the other party's mistake is obvious and unwilling to object, it should be hidden from the venerable person and taboo to the elderly. Naturally, there is little innovation and creation.
It is in this cultural prospect and educational background that Zhang, 5 1 year-old, made a bold decision at the end of this class. He went to the front door of the classroom, fell to the ground and said, students, please step over me.
Zhang said: "This move is not spontaneous, but a teaching link designed two months ago. In doing so, I want to convey a spirit to students in the way of performance art: a spirit of advocating truth and daring to deny authority with truth. To deny authority, start by denying the teacher. I am very happy to be the first person they dare to deny. 」
Although some preparations were made in the lecture, the post-90s college students still didn't do so.
At the scene, the students applauded warmly and took photos of Professor Zhang lying on the ground, but no one took action. Some students even choose to go through the back door, while others choose to wait and see.
At this time, Zhang squatted on the ground and shouted: "Hurry over! Students, show your courage and cross! 」
Four or five students began to try, and later more and more students joined. About a few minutes, about 50 students didn't cross it, 100 students crossed it. Zhang lay prone on the ground and smiled.
Soul Coffee Network Comments: This may be a ceremony beyond authority, but it may also be an open "SM ***".
As soon as this incident came out, many media were full of praise, and some media patted bricks.
But in fact, our commentators are just bystanders, and only they have the right to say what this matter means to the parties. So if you have read some media reports in advance, you may notice that the author changed many words expressing the psychological activities of the parties in the news into objective and neutral behaviors to eliminate subjective assumptions about others.
Meaning, only from the parties themselves how to look at this matter. Others cannot replace it, let alone impose it.
If the brain coffee network guesses as a bystander, then the brain coffee network thinks that students who have crossed two-thirds of the past and those who have not crossed 1/3 have obviously different understandings of this matter. It is not some media that lead readers to think that "all students understand the teacher's intention". The teacher's own understanding of this matter may be different from that of the students.
Teachers believe that lying on the ground encourages students to step on themselves, and "stepping on me as a teacher" is "stepping on authority". Students all want to surpass authority. No students don't want to, so they don't dare to cross authority unless they cross me as a teacher. This is the teacher's understanding of this matter.
In this logic, the teacher equates "I, the teacher on the ground" with "authority", that is, "I" = "authority". Here, the teacher takes the initiative to completely incarnate himself as a symbol, a symbol.
If students accept the teacher's logic and regard "Mr. You on the ground" as only "the representative of authority symbol", then crossing this "the representative of authority symbol" will have a ritualized meaning, and students will gain strength from this real action, which can motivate their students more than just thinking about "I want to defeat authority". Because to "think" is only known in the mind, but the motivation of behavior is not necessarily there. After doing it, the subconscious learns an experience, which is more emotionally acceptable, so it is even more embarrassing to really defeat authority in the future-because it was rehearsed in experience.
Teachers work hard and students benefit a lot-if only it were that simple.
Have you ever thought that confronting authority in reality is actually different from this situation?
The reality is that there is something wrong with authority, so I want to challenge authority. Here, this is a challenge for the sake of challenge.
For example, you will understand:
When you see a person unhappy, it's natural that you want to hit him. It will make you feel better. This is called a challenge.
A good man you like, didn't recruit you, didn't provoke you, and suddenly begged you to hit him. If you are hesitant, he encourages you: "Come on, get up the courage to hit me! This is not a challenge, it's called asking for it.
Do you feel inexplicable and awkward? If he forces you to hit him, ...
Maybe you will "run away" too.
Maybe you will say, it seems that crossing the teacher is not the same thing as hitting the teacher, just like you want to cross a sleeping person to the Datong shop in your own bed. No big deal. When playing sports games, don't you sometimes cross a person? But the author says the meaning here is similar to hitting people. "Stepped on me" = "Beating authority" is defined by the teacher, and this definition contains aggression. Accepting the teacher's definition is tantamount to accepting aggression. Only by accepting the teacher's definition can we conduct such behavior with peace of mind. Then, the students actually admitted that they had attacked the authority.
This attack is for the sake of attack. Because the teacher really didn't do anything critical before this.
Will "attack for the sake of attack" be a bit like the scene of the Cultural Revolution? Although there is this speculation, the author has not experienced that era and it is inconvenient to comment.
But perhaps, why is it more important to defeat authority than to dare to defeat it?
The ancestors said that defeating authority is for the truth, so what do we need this truth for?
Perhaps truth represents the pure land in my heart and the persistence of goodness and beauty.
What is the pursuit of truth, goodness and beauty for?
Maybe it's for people.
So, where are people?
there is a ...
But have we seen him?
When a teacher erases his feelings as a person, he completely turns himself into a symbol.
Can we also regard him as a symbol?
Do we still treat him like a human being?
What we crossed may be a symbol, but it may be a living, flesh-and-blood person.
The teacher regards himself as a symbol and we should respect him. This is his own choice.
However, we can't just regard him as a symbol, because even if he regards himself as a symbol, it can't erase the fact that he is still a person, and he will still have a person's feelings. When he is attacked, he will still be hurt. Even though he welcomes and encourages attacks, even though he may be gratified that students dare to attack, attacks are still attacks.
If we realize this, we shouldn't hurt him.
Why does the author say that this may also be an open "SM ***", and his words are so shocking?
A really good sexual relationship should be what you want, even for SM.
Teachers regard themselves as symbols, beg for abuse and deserve respect.
Students should not forget that teachers are human beings, and it is also worthy of respect to refuse abuse.
But forcing students to forget that the teacher is a person and force them to abuse is not what you want.
This is not worthy of respect.
Don't think it's cool to be an S. When the teacher puts himself in an "M" position, students may have to think, if the teacher regards himself as an "M", how can I treat myself if I cross it?
Forcing people who don't want to be "s" to be "s" is no different from * * * in SM.
Speaking of * * *, give an inappropriate example. I wonder if you have met the piano teacher? If you have seen it, you should remember such a bridge:
The male student wanted to marry the female piano teacher, but she insisted on marrying him.
How do you feel about that man at this time?
Although this is not SM, it feels bad. Although many boys think that * * * is very cool, and it is not good for men to take the lead in being * * * ... but after all, it is not what the man wants, not what you want, so the man does not feel cool, only the embarrassment of being forced.
It is much more difficult to force a kind person to do evil than to make him do good. After all, doing good is good, and you will be satisfied with your self-esteem after doing good. However, a good man must kill his conscience before he can do evil. He must forget his own feelings, ignore the feelings of others and forget that he is an individual, so that he will not treat others as individuals. This will be quite painful. And after doing evil, when he looks back on this matter, how should he face his guilt? Who will take the blame for them? Only themselves.
How much pain does a student have to endure when he doesn't treat the teacher as a person, and when he sees the teacher being crossed by his classmates as a symbol instead of a person?
Those students who didn't walk or cross, are you all right?
The author believes that the students who leave may not be afraid of overstepping their authority, may not have the heart to look directly at such cruelty, or may deliberately choose not to implement such cruelty. If 1/3 has such students, the author sincerely applauds such "unbearable" and "inaction".
Perhaps the "runaway" students are the ones who really overstepped their authority when the professor asked for leg lifts and humiliation.
But there may be a better way than "running away", that is, turning it from "SM" into a real challenge, just like a child has the courage to challenge his father:
"Teacher, we stand up and ask you to challenge me. I accept the challenge, let me beat you!
"Don't lie prone on the ground, hit a person lying on the ground, what's the point? !
"Only you really cow force, only you stand up and challenge me and beat you, I will look cow force! 」
After discussing with readers, P.S. realized that there may be another possibility that the attack will not bring harm to the teacher, that is, although the teacher wants the students to regard themselves as authoritative symbols, in fact, the teacher does not regard himself as authoritative symbols, but regards himself as a member who challenges the authority. This authority may be the authoritative concept of "students can't commit crimes below". In other words, every time a student crosses himself, it helps him to challenge authority. Then the teacher will not feel attacked and hurt, but may really feel quite cool ... but if the author is a student present, I still don't want to cross. It's like sex. If you don't like this kind of drama, then you just don't like it. There is no reason and no reason.
?