Arguing with people at different levels is destined to be a meaningless war of words.
in 1992, Maggie Cheung won Best Actress for "Ruan Lingyu" at the 12th Hong Kong Film Awards.
her acceptance speech at that time still enlightens my view of communication today:
if you win a prize several times, you will learn some things. For example, after the event, many people will say that she should not take it.
I used to mind and argue, but now I have learned that the prize is in my hand. I don't care what you say, it's none of my business. All in all, I want to thank all the people who support me!
when we were young, in the face of disputes, we always spared no effort to seek justice for ourselves.
it was later discovered that everyone can only think on the basis of their own cognition, and people with different levels are destined to have different ways of thinking.
therefore, arguing with people at different levels is destined to be a meaningless war of words.
people with different levels need not be forced to integrate
the writer "Lao Yang's Owl" once said:
"once people recognize something, their ideas will become one-sided and stubborn. In other words, what deceives us is obsession and prejudice."
he has shared his experience:
once, he wrote an article and posted it on Weibo, which was commented by a lot of people. One of them said in the first sentence, "what kind of junk articles are you writing?"
the hard-written article was rated as "garbage". Lao Yang could not help asking, "if there is anything wrong with my article, you are welcome to point it out."
as a result, the other party said confidently, "who can read this kind of junk book?" I only like Nietzsche's philosophy and Kafka's novels. I disdain to read rubbish books like yours. "
Lao Yang was so angry that he argued with the other party: "you haven't even read my book, why do you think it's rubbish?"
after several rounds, the other party became more and more complacent: "most of the people who write books are rubbish, and of course the books you write are rubbish, so you don't have to read them at all."
Lao Yang was enraged and typed an illogical retort, but before sending it, he suddenly realized that he had also become a scumbag who could only scold each other.
there is a "Duck effect" in psychology, which means that people who are incompetent always come to the conclusion that they think they are right, but in fact they are wrong.
group usa prom dresses are destined to provide confidence and charm. Just do it and enjoy wonderful shopping experience.
the more serious the lack of ability, the more like to indulge in the illusory advantages of self-construction, only blindly overestimate their own level, but unable to evaluate others objectively.
in fact, those who do not know how to think and only habitually slander others have this limitation of thinking. Wasting time arguing with them will not only fail to get the other party to recognize themselves, but will bring losses to themselves.
as Lao Yang realized:
if you find that you are not on the same level with the other person, you don't have to talk hard, and you don't have to force yourself to be friends with him. You can feel a little mysterious and comfortable at the distance of learning from the west.
Yes, "the wine is drunk by the bosom friend, and the poem is sung to the meeting."
the rest of life is expensive, and people at different levels don't have to blend in deliberately, let alone try to convince each other with their own values.
the most comfortable state of life is to have a long conversation with like-minded friends all night, and those who don't talk to each other laugh it off.
everyone has different experiences. Please be well with each other
have seen such a passage
people at different levels have different levels of need. Some people have a strong need for material things, some have a strong need for feelings, and some have a strong need to pursue ideals. "
people living at different levels have completely different perceptions of life because of their different experiences.
in the Nature of Film, Krakauer, a famous cinematologist, gave such an example:
A film director made a documentary, which is similar to the city scenery film, recording all the real life of high-rise buildings and bright lights.
the director showed the film to the uncivilized indigenous Africans, but after watching it, the aborigines discussed a chicken cheerfully.
but the director never realized that there was a chicken in his movie. He went back to a frame-by-frame film and found the chicken in the corner.
this chicken appears for less than 8 pictures, and every second of the movie is a continuous movement of 24 pictures, that is to say, the chicken appears for less than a second, and most people are not aware of its existence at all.
but for the natives, the only familiar thing in the whole film is the chicken, so in their eyes, all the tall buildings become the background, and the chicken becomes the protagonist instead.
therefore, there is a saying derived from cinematography, "do you see a chicken?"
means that when everyone looks at the same thing, they will see a chicken, and what that chicken is depends entirely on the person's cultural background, knowledge structure and life experience.
people from different cultural backgrounds have different starting points and different values, and they pay attention to each other at all.
as Mr. Yang Ning, a professor of literature, said:
in daily life, different people will have arguments, the result of the argument is not important at all, the important thing is that there are cognitive differences between the two people themselves, and that cognitive difference is the cause of the dispute.
some people are born bold and adventurous, so they like to watch suspense dramas;
some people live a stressful life, so they like to watch funny variety shows without sense.
but whatever it is, as long as you like it.Is the best.
in the TV series "Golden years", there is a passage:
"everyone is different. I have not experienced what you have experienced, and neither have you experienced what I have experienced, so no one should underestimate the other."
A really high-level person is not to argue and persuade others from a certain angle, but to stick to himself and respect others at the same time.
do not argue, do not reveal, do not ridicule, is the high EQ.
the most powerful debate is actually non-debate
Zhuangzi once said: "the highest state of debate is not to argue, and silence is the best way to treat some people."
argue with others, even if you win, you will hold your breath, hurt others and yourself, and be sure that it is the greatest protection to yourself that you do not argue about everything.
the writer Xu Zuoluo once shared his own experience:
when he went to attend an industry summit, he met a very excellent friend who worked as a consultant. The commission for a single order was 600000 yuan. He only needed to serve seven or eight clients a year to live a good life.
while chatting, this friend heard about the operation mode of porridge Zorro, and began to demonstrate how bad this mode is, and kept on persuading porridge Zorro to change his strategy.
in the whole process, the other party was reasoning entirely on the basis of his own experience and perspective, and did not ask about the details of Zorro at all.
afterwards, porridge Zorro frankly believed that this friend was very good, and he had learned a lot from each other, but the two sides took different paths, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
he has no intention to argue, but only sighs: "Life and career are nothing more than personal choices. Depending on what you like, no one needs to convince each other to do their own thing."
in life, many people like to reason with others and argue with him under the banner of "experienced people". On the contrary, they will be scolded for being ungrateful.
it is better to be silent and turn their suggestions "take the essence and discard the dross" into the strength of their own growth.
some people flatter the theory that reading is useless, just because he has not tasted the sweetness of erudition and does not understand poetry and distance.
instead of wasting time arguing with him about what is really "poetic", it is better to take the time to read two more pages of books.
some people get married early and have children, and their family life is full of feathers, but they still have the courage to despise others: "how come some people don't get married at the age of 30?"
he simply doesn't know that he lives a good life on his own, and he only complains about it. Instead of taking the time to convince him, he might as well make money at ease.
there is a joke on the Internet: "ask a person who has never read a book if he has a 'brief history of time' and he will only think that you are scolding him."
funny but heartbreaking.
Oscar Wilde said: "it is futile to talk to others about what he does not know."
spend all the time arguing to grow up, is to lose the quarrel and win life.
I have seen such a passage:
to argue with people who can understand, at the same level, but have the same feelings as telepathy, may be seeking the truth, while arguing and explaining with people at different levels is only unnecessary self-consumption, or even becomes a personal attack.
Yes, he has never been to the place you have been, nor has he read the books you have read, let alone the people you know. He has accumulated a lifetime of life experience and will not change because of your few words.
the same thing happens to people in different circumstances, and they have completely different feelings and influences on those who have experienced it. There is no difference between right and wrong, and there is no need to persuade each other.
the highest wisdom in life is never to argue with people of different levels.