History has always been an irreplaceable past in today’s society. We were born in the present, and we are all born in different countries. The history we learn in different countries is naturally different. The history taught in textbooks is not necessarily complete or the most correct. After all, we are not the ones who come over, and we will never know what happened before. In addition, many countries will only choose history that is beneficial to their own country, and hide the bad things or bad deeds that their country has done, so that modern people cannot fully learn history, only know that the government wants them to Things to know. After all, history is an indelible existence, and it is also the most important part of today. I personally think it is a past that cannot be hidden and cannot be changed.
When we were just born, we were not self-conscious, and we did not understand the pictures. We could only rely on the words of the family to make the initial judgment. The first is language ability. Like me, the first language I heard was Mandarin, which naturally speaks Mandarin when we grow up. We do n’t have much memory to learn the mother tongue, or even do n’t remember it, but we can know by the future days, In fact, it is parents who have tried their best to tell us how to speak, and we rely on our hearing ability to know how to speak. And from the kindergarten to the elementary school, it was still not literate, but it can rely on some charts to remember some words and express content. I believe that many people have many fairy tales and childhood, all of them are simple and easy to understand pictures. With some simple text, the text and the reading method are annotated, and the children can’t think they read it. Under the dual learning of vision and hearing, they can help the child’s growth. Of course, when it comes to junior high school and even college, it is more about understanding the book directly from the book composed of words. It is like reading a novel. We can always fill in the pictures in many novels, even if the Without a picture, you can come up with a rough look. In addition to stimulating your imagination, you can also improve your reading ability.
I ’m a person who ca n’t read. I ca n’t remember any subjects I ’m not good at, and I ca n’t learn anything. If I can rely on pictures to understand what is taught me, then the learning aspect More helpful. I have always felt that during the learning process, the pictures and the text cannot be separated, because it is necessary to understand the connection between the two works. If they are separated, even if you know what this word means, you still will not know what he is like. The concept, the picture is also, if you give a picture full of flowers and plants and grass, but do not say that this is a green grassland, you may unauthorizedly believe that this piece of flowers and plants is just a small flower bed.
I think economics is not science. Science is predictable and can be explored with the wisdom of human beings. Although the economy can determine the development trend in the next few years according to the current society, it cannot calculate variables. It ’s like parents often tell me, “Plan ca n’t keep up with changes.” We can never know what will happen in the future, so we ca n’t know whether there will be another financial storm in the future. Compared with science, science is not likely to change because of many variables. As long as we go to calculate science, there are basically few mistakes. There may be calculation errors, but science will not change because of the world.
I don’t think there are universal moral values in the world. Everyone has different values. And humans are pack animals, and what most people think is right in the eyes of a few. A lot of times people are treated as different because they have different thoughts and behaviors.
Universal moral values represent the values that the so-called “ordinary people” believe in, such as giving up your seat if you see an old person on the bus, which is the universal moral values, and such as “if you have money, you must donate to the disadvantaged”, this moral value is not necessarily the same for all people.
I think we should not only look at the result, such as right and wrong, all right and wrong are based on what one thinks “morality”, and also look at the cause of things.
All things belong to its reason, like a thief broke into the home, was injured by the master of the home, so I think the person who injured others is not wrong, because the thief should not break into the home.
For me, if that things is that me happy, feeling better, more lucky, it will be a good thing, same, if I feel sad, angry, feeling goes down, it was a bad things for me. Right and wrong is depends for person, family, school, country, etc. For example, when I was in Taiwan, my school had one rule: “Can’t order the food or eat unhealthy foods.”, But in Brookes, what I want to eat, what time I want to order the foods, teacher will not said anything. In my before school, order the foods is wrong, but in here is ok, is correct.
I like it best and think the best article is Stephen’s Guide. This article provides several examples for us to refer to, and it is also good to know what is abusive reasoning. Some of the reasoning is not true, some of the reasoning is true, and the final answer is determined by the current situation.
There are two kinds of reasoning that are most common, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. These are the simplest and most commonly used, especially inductive reasoning, but with varying degrees of accuracy.
No inductive inference is perfect. That means that any inductive inference can sometimes fail. Even though the premises are true, the conclusion might be false. Nonetheless, a good inductive inference gives us a reason to believe that the conclusion is probably true.
This is part of Socrates’ discussion of whether virtue can be taught or not. I think everyone has a different idea, which makes virtue more complicated.
At first they thought that virtue could be taught, but there was no teacher of virtue, no real definition of it, and maybe what we think of as a wrong definition could be right. Since there is no teacher of virtue, Socrates is beginning to feel that the first syllogism is wrong.
It is the goodness in our hearts and the morality we will never understand. I believe that there will still be people in this world who know what virtue is. Maybe they just don’t know how to teach others.
Virtue is vague, it is impenetrable knowledge, they says that it is a god-given power, and it may be nothing more than that man himself takes the initiative to do what he thinks good, and calls it virtue.
Since than it is not only because of knowledge that men will be good and useful to their country, where such men are to be found, but also on account of right opinion; and since neither of these two things— knowledge and true opinion— is a natural property of mankind, being acquired— or do you think that either of them is natural?
Not I. (Page. 44)
At the beginning of these two passages, Socrates and Meno discuss the existence of virtue and whether it can be taught. They’ve talked before about the memory of the soul, so at first Socrates assumes that virtue is a kind of wisdom that can be taught, because virtue is a kind of goodness.
Socrates: Then may we assert this as a universal rule, that in man all other things depend upon the soul, while the things of the soul herself depend upon wisdom, if they are to be good; and so by this account the profitable will be wisdom, and virtue, we say, is profitable? (page. 32)
Then he began to talk with another man about whether virtue could be taught, and the man thought it could be taught, but he thought the wise man could not, and that it would be a waste to communicate with the wise man.
After some discussion, Socrates overturns the assumption that virtue can be taught because there is no such thing as a teacher of virtue.
When I first read it, I could see clearly what Socrates was trying to say, but in the end it was like being stuck in a quagmire and not knowing what he was talking about. I’ve seen it over and over and over again, and I still can’t make it clear, but I wonder if Socrates is trying to say that if you think rationally you can get real wisdom, that you can’t be perfect from the beginning, but that you become good by reason and what you think is good. Everyone understands the good differently, but everyone knows what the so-called good is. Virtue can not be taught, but knowledge can be taught, once there is wisdom, may be learned from the actions of others so-called virtue.
No matter how much we say, if we don’t know the root of virtue, we can’t teach it to others. People who know what virtue is may not be able to truly understand it.
The second of part is that Meno and Socrates are discussing “the soul of man”. Socrates thinks that our souls are constantly circulating in the world, and that they know a lot of things that we may not know.
At first I had no idea why they were talking about such unrealistic things, but then I thought, maybe that’s one of the things Socrates is trying to tell us, not that we are ignorant, but that we don’t want to think. Human beings may never remember the memory of the soul, but Socrates and a boy did an experiment, at the beginning of the boy justifiably think his answer is right, but after Socrates’ torture, the boy finally began to have doubts about his answer, and then think from it.
He began to think, also gradually recalled the answer to the soul in his body. It may sound unrealistic, but that’s probably the smartest thing about being human. I particularly like what Socrates said:
Most of the points I have made in support of my argument are not such as I can confidently assert; but that the belief in the duty of inquiring after what we do not know will make us better and braver and less helpless than the notion that there is not even a possibility of discovering what we do not know, nor any duty of inquiring after it—this is a point for which I am determined to do battle, so far as I am able, both in word and deed.
It was this inspiring passage that made me understand what Socrates had said.