Recently, I watched the debate on "Fan Paopao" in "One Tiger, One Talk" about Wenchuan Earthquake. Fan Meizhong deserves to be a graduate of Peking University. When arguing with "national articles", the logic is clear. Although he knows that he is in a weak position in public opinion, he still insists on his own ideas and does not show weakness.
In contrast, "Guo Tiaotiao" just tossed and turned with a few viewpoints, such as improper metaphor and poor diction, and once left the scene willfully, which was really rude. Interestingly, after this program was broadcast, public opinion turned to criticize Fan Meizhong from the beginning. Many netizens expressed their understanding and sympathy, and even admitted that "if I had to choose a kindergarten teacher between Fan Paopao and Guo Tiaopao, I would choose Fan Paopao."
To be fair, we can't comment on Fan Meizhong's behavior of leaving students behind when the earthquake comes. Ask yourself, when disaster strikes, how many people can sacrifice themselves like Tan Qianqiu?
Human instinct is to protect themselves from harm. Some experts say that human instinct can be divided into "low-level instinct" and "high-level instinct". Low-level instinct urges people to seek advantages and avoid disadvantages, while high-level instinct makes people aware of their social responsibilities. But when the disaster comes, especially in the face of the earthquake, which is only a few tens or even seconds, can you really think of so many things and so many factors? More rely on low-level instinct to seek self-protection. Why do many netizens say that they don't like the moral emperor like Guo Tiaotiao after watching the program? It is because Guo Tiaotiao is just a lip-service, criticizing Fan Paopao condescendingly from the perspective of God. This project encourages more people to put themselves in others' shoes. In that case, do you think of protecting yourself or saving students first? At this time, many people began to hesitate. After all, it is easier said than done. It is impossible for everyone to be a saint and sacrifice themselves to save others. Moreover, Fan Paopao himself admits that he is not a brave man.
Fan Paopao is a troubled man. He experienced that terrible disaster, which certainly hurt his spirit and deserved sympathy. However, he has another identity, that is, the people's teacher. In the Wenchuan earthquake, I believe that Fan Paopao was not the only teacher who left his students behind, but why Fan Paopao was unanimously criticized by public opinion was because of his high-profile defensive behavior of "spontaneous consciousness" after "instinct". Fan Paopao posted on the Internet, defending his "running first" behavior in TV programs with high profile. How can such remarks not make people angry? "Put yourself before others, sacrifice is a choice, not a virtue" and "Even my mother, I wouldn't care in that case"?
The Wenchuan earthquake caused "69,227 deaths, 374,643 injuries and 17923 missing", which was shocking. Under the social background that the whole country mourned the dead, saved the survivors, rebuilt their homes for the victims, and even volunteers and firefighters lost their precious lives, Fan Paopao, as a teacher, made such remarks, which aroused the sensitive nerves of the whole society. There is no doubt that he is a rescuer.
The "Yuan Incident" during the 20 10 Yushu earthquake can be said to be a footnote for Fan Paopao. When the whole country prayed for the people in Yushu disaster area and stopped all entertainment activities, netizen Yuan complained in the post bar because he couldn't play QQ dazzle dance, complaining about the people in the disaster area, saying, "Ding P, the special earthquake didn't even play games, I hate them."
In addition, China people have emphasized "filial piety" since ancient times, and those who can even leave their mothers behind are simply challenging the core traditional values of the Chinese nation, which is intolerable. It is conceivable that Fan Paopao's remarks were criticized by public opinion at that time. There is an old saying in China that "filial piety is the first virtue". As a teacher, even the most basic filial piety cannot be taught to students. Is it immoral? Won't those parents who support Fan Meizhong as a kindergarten teacher feel chilling when they see such remarks?
It is no exaggeration to sympathize with and understand Fan Paopao's "running first" behavior. After all, he shows the instinctive side of human beings-everyone may have a "Zhao Bubble" and a "Wang Bubble" in their hearts. However, if Fan Paopao's high-profile defense behavior is tolerated, it will damage the credibility of intellectuals.
During the period of disaster relief, it will damage the reputation of intellectuals to change Fan Meizhong from a person who needs to defend into a person who should learn and give him the titles of "honesty" and "courage". The public will think that intellectuals are timid people, selfish people and people who will run away when they get cold feet. Intellectuals should have a sense of social responsibility, take responsibility and shoulder the heavy responsibility of guiding people's thinking, which is the right given to intellectuals by society. An intellectual like Fan Paopao, in his own name, expands the situation and publicizes his own ideas, at least to his disadvantage. Especially in the case of Fan Meizhong, it is dangerous to insist that he is not wrong, and it is a great and liberal model.
Fan Paopao is a real person, telling the truth, but his truth touches the fragile nerves of society. There is nothing wrong with freedom of speech, but it should not challenge people's moral bottom line in a special social environment.
Good night, this is the leaf of memory.
In this noisy city
Share my thoughts with you.
Wish you all the best!
I haven't bought it now, and I don't dare to think about getting back the money, so as not to get deeper i