In fact, the reason why Ye Feng was able to do it was to quickly and perfectly handle the snow porpoise. This is not because Ye Feng has any protagonist aura.
First of all, Ye Feng's eyes that see all things clearly are many times more powerful than a microscope. The capillaries are as thin as hair, but in front of Ye Feng, they are no different from a giant.
Secondly, Ye Feng has absolute control over his power. Whatever form you think it takes, it naturally includes control over the size of the power and the precision of his movements.
Finally, as for sword skills, Ye Feng's sword realm has surpassed the Sword Emperor realm at this moment and has reached the Yin and Yang realm of life and death.
If you have to say this, it’s because of Ye Feng’s protagonist aura. So I want to ask you, do you know what you are talking about? I can put it another way, because Ye Feng is the protagonist, with the protagonist's halo and destiny, so he can do those "protagonist" things that ordinary people can't do, and it has nothing to do with hard work. This is the most typical fatalism. Regarding fatalism, we have discussed it before and will not go into details here.
By the way, I borrowed the famous line from Douyin, "Doing anything good will only harm you." I just want to say, "Being rebellious in everything will only harm you."
. . .
In reality, to handle pufferfish, one must undergo professional training and obtain the corresponding pufferfish certificate. Moreover, in restaurants, the chef must take the first bite of every puffer fish dish served to the guests in front of the guests. This is the same as the ancient emperors who had eunuchs test the poison of every dish they ate.
. . .
Talking back to things in the kitchen, although in fact, Ye Feng did not need the help of Ren Xiaojin and the other five. But that's in terms of efficiency. But the situation at this moment should have long been past the point of view of efficiency. The important thing is not the efficiency, but the fact that Ren Xiaojin and the others are cooking together with Ye Feng, that is the meaning.
Let’s talk about something realistic.
When humans come from trees to the ground, from crawling to standing and walking, every step is the result of biological evolutionary selection. When individual human beings are too weak to survive, the collective is the inevitable choice for human beings. Over the course of thousands of years of civilized history, there have been countless intelligent people, but history has never seen a completely liberal dynasty.
The collective will always exist.
And we have to admit that integrating into the collective in order to survive is not a noble and correct choice, but a last resort. In order to integrate into the group, individuals will have to give up some things, the most obvious one is personal personality, but the degree of giving up is different for each person. You can also understand it as the contradiction between individuality and collectiveness.
If everyone in a group has a completely distinct personality and refuses to give up an inch, then the group will be unable to accomplish anything.
The book "The Crowd" is a social psychology work written by Gustave Le Bon. But unlike the perspective widely used in some psychology books, "The Crowd" studies the meaning of groups from the perspective of groups for individuals.
There are a few sentences in this book that I still like very much:
1. What plays a greater role in determining people's historical status is not their "real" appearance, but how future generations understand and feel about them.
2. As soon as a person joins a group, his or her IQ is severely reduced. In order to gain recognition, individuals are willing to abandon right and wrong and use their IQ to exchange for a sense of belonging that makes people feel safer.
3. Making concise and powerful assertions, ignoring any reasoning or evidence, is one of the most reliable ways to get a certain idea into the minds of the masses. The simpler and clearer an assertion is, and the poorer the evidence and proof appear to be, the more powerful it is.
4. Groups are not good at reasoning, but they are eager to act. Groups can only do two things - add icing on the cake or add insult to injury.
5. “Exaggeration, certitude, repetition, and absolutely no proof of anything—these are the common arguments used by orators at public gatherings.”
6. The masses have never really thirsted for the truth, and they will turn a deaf ear to evidence that does not suit their taste...Anyone who can provide them with illusions can easily become their master; anyone who disillusiones them will become their victims.
7.Quantity is justice
8. Master the art of influencing the imagination of the masses, and master the art of ruling them
9. It is not the facts themselves that influence people’s imagination, but the way they occur and attract attention.
10. An individual must be held accountable for his actions - legally or morally. However, this is not the case for groups. The group does not need to bear any responsibility. The group is responsibility, the group is morality, the group is law, and the group's behavior is naturally reasonable.
11. In the eternal conflict with reason, emotion never loses its hand
12. Our civilization is the product of a few people with extraordinary intelligence. These people form the top of a pyramid. As each level of this pyramid widens, so does the intelligence. The base of this pyramid is the broad masses of a nation.
13. For history, personal destiny may be hidden in a very small decimal point, but for individuals, it is one hundred percent of life.
14. We think that we are rational, and that every move we make makes sense. But in fact, most of our daily actions are the result of hidden motives that we ourselves have no way of understanding.
15. The so-called belief can make a person completely enslaved by his own dreams.
He really has a thorough understanding of group nature and human nature. I suspect that Ye Feng must have read this book.
But neither I nor Ye Feng fully agree with this book. Indeed, if we only talk about collectivity and kill individuality, this is wrong in itself, but "the opposite is the movement of Tao". If we only talk about individuality and deny collectiveness, isn't it going from one extreme to the other?
This is like using science to criticize metaphysics as superstition. Science and metaphysics are just two different angles from which people understand the world. We despise the "superstition" of metaphysics, but blindly believe in science. Have you ever thought about it? This is not the same as "superstition". As far as science itself is concerned, science is progressing, and what we insist on now may be proven wrong in the future as science develops. So what is the meaning of your blind belief at this moment?
So real scientists are never "scientists"
We have a classic saying that the end of science is metaphysics. Didn’t Newton and Einstein both study theology in their later years? Why do you think that was?
The continued existence of this world has never been determined by good or evil, but by balance. Extreme left or extreme right, extreme good or extreme evil will lead to the collapse of the world. Only balance can last long.
