After learning so much knowledge in his previous life, Wang Xiaolie also found it a little strange to talk about destiny here seriously. any idea? Wang Xiaolie thought a lot, but he only found this way.
Some people may say, from the knowledge in the previous life, from learning this theory, that doctrine, various systems, which one is not more reliable than destiny? However, the fact is that no one is more reliable than destiny.
Since the Song Dynasty was destroyed by the Mongols, China's culture has actually been at a low ebb. In the Qing Dynasty, there was even more chaos. At this time, Westerners used strong ships and cannons to open the door of China, and all the people learned Western culture.
Learning is something that should be done and must be done. But what must be understood is that learning is not easy. You must be serious and careful, and you must seek truth from facts. In "Transforming Our Learning", the teacher said that many people always refer to Greece, but forget their own ancestors. There are also many people who sound reasonable in theory, but are far from reality. A hundred years later, this situation has not changed.
Teachers are talented and ambitious, determined to build a new world. Unlike the teacher, Wang Xiaolie only wanted to transform the old world. In terms of ideology, Wang Xiaolie was different from his teachers in many ways. For example, he would not overturn the verdicts of Qin Shihuang and Cao Cao, and would not criticize Confucianism but praise Legalism, etc. This has to do with personal experience and understanding, as well as facing different realities.
After the late Qing Dynasty, various ideas transmitted from the West, including various isms, doctrines, and trends of thought, all bore the imprint of Western civilization. No matter you are a materialist or an idealist, a liberal or a socialist, whatever ideas you believe in, the brand will be there.
Many scholars are proud that their ideas bear the imprint of Western civilization. However, in the Song Dynasty, who would think that the civilization and political thought of Greece and Rome were great? Facing Chinese civilization, which other civilization is qualified to be superior?
In "The Great Battle", when passing the Yellow Emperor's Mausoleum, the teacher said something: We are unworthy descendants.
It was because of the unworthy descendants that the Chinese civilization faced its darkest moment, so it learned from Greece and Rome. Rather than being civilized and letting our descendants suffer, they have to learn from Greece and Rome. It won't work if we don't understand this point clearly.
When Wang Xiaolie wants to preach and talk about destiny, he often appears immature, and there is nothing he can do about it. Because I learned a lot of knowledge in my previous life, but no one taught me the most basic knowledge, and no one actually studied it.
In this era, when the country is in ruins and the family is in ruins, how can we save China? Learn from the British constitutional monarchy, learn from the separation of powers from the United States, even learn from Germany and Japan, and even learn from New China. Are you a child? Apart from elementary school, at which other stage of learning did you learn this way? If you know what is happening but don't know why, what's the use of learning a superficial knowledge? If we learn how to govern a country in this way, within a hundred or two hundred years, there will still be only a few developed countries in the world, and developing countries will not be able to develop.
The same principle applies to doctrines and systems. There is no magic in these isms and systems, no hard work, and they cannot bring about earth-shaking changes. The most important thing is not these.
For a long time, teachers and intellectuals disliked each other. Wang Xiaolie thought that there must be a big reason for this divergence of concepts. After reading all the history books, I came to the conclusion that China's military was incompetent after the Song Dynasty. After seeing the suffering, I realized that the reason for China's backwardness was poor culture. The results of this study can only make people shake their heads.
What is the mark of civilization? Wang Xiaolie believes that in this civilization system, there are things that cannot be removed in the end. In a way, it is similar to the worldview, but it is not, but more fundamental.
Wang Xiaolie likes to use a more literary saying, the mark of civilization is what will be at the end of time in this civilization.
Wang Xiaolie was not familiar with the civilizations of Greece and Rome and only had a rough idea. But for him, it's probably enough to know.
The brand of European and American civilization actually has little to do with ancient Greece, because this brand is God. No matter what knowledge you have, whether you are a materialist or an idealist, whether you believe in God or not, according to the theories of European and American civilization, God will always be there at the end of time. For the most part, these theories won't push past the end of time. There are also some theories that change God by various names.
There is a widely circulated saying that the end of science is theology and the end of politics is religion. This sentence actually sums up European and American civilization very well. Although many people have various opinions, they say that the end of science is not God, and the end of politics is not religion. Most of these statements are just statements and cannot change the fundamentals.
Because in European and American civilization, there is always a God standing there at the end of time. Almost all theories, no matter what doctrine or trend of thought, according to their theories, there will always be a God standing there at the end of time. Or don't go to the end of time, seal the theoretical road halfway and become a dead end. Open the dead end, God still stands at the end of time.
Why do many scientists believe in God? Although many of them are atheists, they must emphasize that the God they are talking about is not God in the religious sense. But in the end, they still have to believe in God?
Because modern science developed from European civilization, it naturally bears the imprint of European civilization. Even if you don’t believe in God all your life and are a staunch materialist, you will eventually find that God is standing at the end of time.
Does science only look one way? Is the scientific path of mankind the only path? Actually not. Science itself is an approximation of the real world, which of course comes in many forms. It's just that there are not as many civilizations on earth as we think, and the civilization developed in Europe is too strong, creating an illusion.
If science is not like this, what else would it be like? Wang Xiaolie didn't know either. Because the only science I have ever come into contact with is the science that bears the stamp of European civilization. God knows what it would look like if it were marked by other civilizations.
Why mention it? Because the brand of Chinese civilization is Tao. What does the Tao look like? It looked like Wang Xiaolie didn't know, and he could only explore slowly. Only by slowly exploring can we get a rough outline.
Regardless of whether they study thought or science, these ancient Chinese thoughts are often dismissed. When talking about Tao, I often mention it casually, is Tao the law? Is Tao a law? The Tao is of course not the law.
Confucius said that if you hear the Tao in the morning, you will die in the evening. What is the Tao that Confucius talks about that has reached this point? Many future generations do not study it deeply, and many people even think that they are smarter than Confucius. For thousands of years, people have tended to ignore this sentence. Why? Because I don’t understand.
In Wang Xiaolie's previous life, many people thought they were smarter than the ancient Chinese. I don’t take ancient thoughts particularly seriously, and I don’t really think about why the ancients thought the way they did, or what issues they were talking about. There are always people who think that because they have learned so much knowledge that the ancients did not know, they must know more than the ancients.
All I can say is, we are unworthy descendants.
When Lao Tzu wrote the Tao Te Ching, he did not think that he had left a mark on Chinese civilization. The Tao became the mark of civilization not because of Lao Tzu alone, but because of the joint efforts of many people before him, at the same time as him, and after him. It has become a brand of civilization and affects Chinese civilization in all aspects. Whether you believe it or not, intentionally avoid it or study hard, it’s hard to escape your mind.
Knowing the end of time, knowing the background of civilization, and having a clear understanding of various thoughts.
Hegel is a German philosopher. He has an identity that the Chinese people particularly value: he is the philosophical source of Marxism-Leninism. After seeing the translation of Confucius's "The Analects", Hegel had a low evaluation and thought it had little value. After understanding some characteristics of Chinese, I said that Chinese is an inferior language. His remarks had an impact on many people.
As we know, based on the ideas of various civilizations, there is an imprint. If you cannot even recognize this imprint, then your ideological achievements will be very limited. Then you know that Hegel, who was praised to heaven, was at best a third-rate student in a civilized classroom. It is very ridiculous in itself for third-rate students to evaluate Confucius.
And if you can't even understand Hegel's thoughts and feel how profound knowledge they are, it will be difficult to get a seat in a civilized classroom.
The development of human history and thought do not advance in a straight line. Many times, humans take detours. We have taken too many detours. Only by looking back, rethinking the thoughts of the ancients and combining them with human practice can we truly think clearly. This was the case with the Renaissance in Europe. We looked back at ancient Greece and Rome and found a new path. Were those thinkers in ancient Greece particularly powerful and pointed the way for future generations? Of course not. They were great, and it was their descendants who were so great, and they traced their thoughts. In China, is it because the ancients’ ideas and culture are not good enough? Not pointing the way for future generations? Of course not. It is the future generations who are unworthy and useless, so the responsibility is put on them.
After the Han Dynasty, Confucianism has been in decline. Until the Tang Dynasty, the magnanimity and broad-mindedness of the great country, coupled with the fact that the emperor worshiped Taoism and Buddhism, made Confucian scholars reflect. In the Song Dynasty, the results were formed and Confucianism was revived.
Song Confucians traced Han Confucianism and put forward their own thoughts. But the actual results were unsatisfactory and did not bring about the prosperity of the Song Dynasty. There are many reasons for the weakness of the Song Dynasty's military, but emphasizing culture over military force is definitely not the important reason. Studying history is not what learning does. Military issues must first be discussed from the perspective of military affairs, rather than rambling here and there, without talking about the military itself.
Why is China lagging behind? Don’t talk about the incompetence of Chinese culture. Chinese culture has always been very good. It's because later generations are useless and lagging behind, and they are unwilling to spend time and effort to study why it doesn't work, so they put the blame on the ancients.
Song Confucianism traced Han Confucianism, but no greater achievements were made. Then we can only take one step back, to the time when hundreds of schools of thought contended in the pre-Qin period. It’s not that the people at that time were so powerful or smart, but that they put forward a lot of ideas. Combined with a thousand years of practice, correct ideas are summed up from these ideas. To a certain extent, this is similar to the European Renaissance. If you take too many detours, look back.
When studying Europe, it would be ridiculous to mention Greece in everything. It’s not that these ancient Greek philosophers were so great, but that the Europeans during the Renaissance and industrialization were so great. What is not obvious to those outside of civilization?
