It's all fictional, just for fun, but the reasoning is real.
For example, if you rarely eat lobsters, and you attend a gathering where some people disdain wasting time eating and rush to socialize, it may seem impressive.
If you are focused on eating alone, it might leave others with the impression that you lack experience and have never seen the world.
There’s a video of Cao Dewang where he eats during a break at a gathering, and the security or secretary beside him doesn’t let them disturb his meal.
Ren Zhengfei's daughter seems to take her mother's surname.
When chatting with friends about military matters or global dynamics, if you don’t understand, even if you have a close relationship, they might say you really lack experience.
Regarding a new project at your company that you don’t know how to handle, and your boss says you’re the CTO now. How can you be so inexperienced? Of course, if he’s not intentionally making things difficult for you, he’s just joking. Haha.
Making money selling cabbage while worrying like you're in Zhongnanhai. Is this experience? Is this prejudice?
Having read a lot of news, books, done many things, met many impressive people, traveled around the world, and experienced various lifestyles—does that mean you have experience?
Or is it just the literal meaning, recognizing what you see? What’s the difference from intelligent recognition functions? There is a difference; simultaneous interpretation is quite expensive by the hour, while other voice recognition services are cheaper.
Wukong's keen eyesight shows high experience, but it’s not very useful; many recognitions can’t be handled. Does it imply class? Is it something that can’t be crossed or is very difficult to cross?
After Wukong achieves his goal, does his experience become fixed? Fighting monsters becomes a specific problem analysis and solution, knowing whom to seek help from, calling for reinforcements, indeed showing leadership. Isn’t that what leaders do? No, everyone does that. Otherwise, the service industry wouldn’t keep growing.
Wukong’s experience here is being able to prevent scams, high-level scams targeting lower-level people, but the golden cicada is also quite miserable, switching between high and low levels.
Speaking of lobsters, you recognize them as good things, but some people pretend to recognize them and claim to eat them often, seemingly having developed high uric acid from eating them every day, leading to the feeling of not being able to eat them now. It gives off a sense of high status. You see him wearing a short-sleeve deep blue shirt that has faded to light blue, which can only be worn in a million-dollar club, and you smile. Pretending to be very knowledgeable. You say, “Bro, you eat them often, huh? Uric acid levels too high?”
That guy stretches out his hand, trying to tug at his golden Bitcoin symbol ring, with swollen joints from gout, unable to take the ring off.
Reference
About Politics, You Must Have Misunderstood These Concepts (Political Philosophy History, 3rd Edition) Review
Some interesting viewpoints.
Note
Hegel once said, "China has no history," because history should have its purpose, while China's history is essentially a dead cycle. According to the ancient Greeks, the Chinese have never engaged in politics. Because politics should arise from persuasion, not conquest.
The meaning of politics should point to the legitimacy of authority; only those with swords are rogues and robbers. Military and politics are antonyms; military dictatorship arises from political failure, reverting to a state without politics, back to power struggles, force, and direct repression.
There are two ways for humanity to rule: through military confrontation or verbal disputes. The ancient Greeks invented the concept of "politics," believing that politics is the art of language. Using "politics" to solve problems means persuasion, negotiation, voting, and reaching agreements, rather than military force, dictatorship, or conquest.
The ancient Greeks viewed politics as an honor, representing human civilization and the fundamental distinction between humans and animals. Politics should reflect a consensus, a collective pursuit of freedom, fairness, and justice.
Many people believe that liberals are equivalent to atheists. Most theists have constraints, and few liberals hold the concept of "God exists." This view is mostly derived from some superficial impressions of modern liberalism.
Many who now call themselves "liberals" rarely understand the historical foundations of liberalism. Liberals are quite wary of government, viewing it as a necessary evil, with its powers limited to basic public affairs. In the minds of liberals, a qualified government should at least meet three criteria:
-
Power cannot be concentrated in one person's hands; there must be a precise system to prevent the unlimited expansion of power, known as the separation of powers. This vigilance towards power is based on the Christian doctrine of original sin. The Bible states that there is no righteous person in this world; even the seemingly perfect person can hardly guarantee they won’t commit evil under the temptation of power and become a totalitarian dictator. Therefore, designing a system to prevent the monopolization of power is essential.
-
The government must fully respect human rights. The foundation of liberalism is human rights, believing that everyone has the rights to life, property, and freedom, which are sacred and inviolable. This idea originates from the Christian culture of "natural rights," where God created humans in His image, making human life precious and inviolable, which is the foundation of human rights.
If we strip away Christian culture and independently discuss the concept of human rights, it becomes vague and unfounded, unable to explain why animals do not have these basic rights. If we only follow the jungle law of evolution, survival of the fittest, then the weak should be eliminated, and what necessity is there for the strong to uphold the basic rights of the weak?