No matter people who eat melons, experts and scholars, soy sauce makers or celebrities, they all express their opinions, and some even express their opinions. There are maintenance, criticism, moderation, and others. In fact, no matter what angle, everyone is out of his own three views and purposes. It's just that some people have high status and great influence, some people speak softly, some people will snatch the moral high ground, and some people will pack and fool. If it were me, I would stick to the rules and take my three views as the starting point.
In fact, sometimes many things and problems are really simple, as long as everyone takes sides-a team of defenders, a team of critics, a team of moderates and so on. When voting, are you for, against or abstaining? Isn't this what the West calls "democracy"? Simplify complex problems!
After all this nonsense, which team am I on?
First of all, I want to know how many words the president of Peking University has mispronounced. I looked it up on the Internet and wanted to find the full version of his live speech video, but I only found the clip video that misread "Yu Hong" for dozens of seconds, so it was difficult to find the full version. So it is difficult for me to determine how many words the president of Peking University has mispronounced.
After checking the Internet, he was generally criticized for misreading the question "Yu Hong (pronounced Hong Hao)", including his apology for this mistake.
However, there are still many posts saying that he mispronounced several words: (Hao), (Jing), Dun (Dun) and Ugly (wet behind the ears).
The question of how many words are mispronounced is very important.
If the president of Peking University mispronounced only one word-Hao, although incredible, after all, this word can be pronounced by at least junior high school students, but considering many factors, even if it is difficult to understand, we can forgive him. It is human nature to make mistakes. After all, he is over 60 years old and has limited energy. As the headmaster, he is busy with social activities and has no time to read the speech written by his secretary in advance. I think, as he himself said, the lesson this time is enormous.
However, as the president of Peking University, if he mispronounced the words one by one, it would be different, whether he mispronounced the words (Hao), (Jing), Dun and Ugly (wet behind the ears) in this speech or included the previous speeches, as long as he mispronounced them. After all, even junior high school students can understand these words, not to mention a doctoral tutor's doctor, not to mention that he is a science and engineering student, so junior high school students are liberal arts students? !
From this incident, we can see that the administration of education in China is too serious and the bureaucracy is too harmful.
A person's energy is limited. If he spends a lot of time on academic research, he will have no time and mind to be "the way to be an official and the way to lead" and think about how to get promoted all day.
If he spends all his time wooing friends, being a leader and being promoted, he will have no mind and energy to engage in academic research.
I have seen two jokes before: "those with good knowledge should be academic, those with poor knowledge should be led", and "those with academic knowledge should be led, but not academic leaders". Although the joke is a bit extreme, it can be seen from the spelling mistake of the president of Peking University that this phenomenon does not exist.
In fact, modern people in China are becoming more and more utilitarian and materialistic. Even if they engage in scientific research, academics and teaching, many of them are for utilitarian purposes. Who told us that our whole society is like this?
Of course, there is nothing wrong with a utilitarian purpose and mentality. As long as you are conscientious and realistic, you can also contribute to national development and social progress. However, this is not necessarily the case in real life.
For their own utilitarian purposes, some people began to take risks and muddle through, such as academic fraud, ghostwriting, plagiarism, or taking advantage of their own rights to seize the achievements of others.
The size of the official position and the level of the professional title do not necessarily represent the level of knowledge. Isn't there a story of "being promoted to three levels in a row"?
So don't be too superstitious about their positions and titles. Principals don't become principals because of their high level of knowledge, and professors and senior titles don't necessarily have their high level of knowledge. The so-called master is in the folk!
postscript
Personal views are inevitably biased, please forgive me!