This was the first time that “know the molecules” had appeared as “the other side of the intellectuals”. Through the ferocious wang soo, one is surprised to be reminded that the seemingly knowledgeable cultural people “know nothing”。
But what really recast the “knower” into a sociological concept and widely disseminated to the general public is the 2002 issue of the new week cover, “commute to knower”. It redefines the spiritual connotations of “knower” and “intellectual”, portrays for the first time “knower” as the existence of a new intellectual form and perpetuates the influence of such naming。
During that decade, “know-your-minor” became a new and clearly acclaimed identity of the intellectual community, and it became a form of spiritual added value and even a new posture based (or imitated) on intellectual traditions。
Wood。
However, for more than a decade now, even “intellectuals” have been subjected to critical reinterpretation in the western context, and “intellectuals” have been stripped of the illusions of meaning in the cultural soil in which they were born, and have gradually been reduced to “the opposite side of the intellectuals” in the age of network fragmentation。
Zhou hanmin, vice-president of the national political consultative council, said: “we often thought that china was close to the world when it had 1. 25 billion smartphones. But these phones have largely created many "know the molecules," and what china needs is intellectuals."
The new media observer wei wuhua also said that it would be too easy to play a rich car on twitter, often with some adages. It is not possible to express its own views on social events or to meet the expectations of many fans. Many are actually “knowers” rather than “intellectuals”. His column has been signed on a permanent basis as follows: it is expensive and unconscionable. ("death at 100 degrees?" "yes." this paragraph is now a sarcasm explanation for "living alive."
Society needs intellectuals。
How deep is the divide between “know what” and “know what”? The idea of being nominated as an "annual knower" in the new week was publicly stated: "i hate this word!" in his view, knowing the difference between molecules and intellectuals was simply a distance away。
The five major criteria for knowing the molecules have also been listed: 1. Knowing the molecules like the network, and any one of them is a multiplicity of ideas, principles, definitions, theories, and a wide range of areas. Know that the molecules are not lonely and have close ties to the media. Invisibility and knowledge of molecules are contradictory terms. 3. It is well known that the extremists are more keen to criticize than the original, and they know best to enjoy more pleasure than others in rejecting opponents. 4. Know that the molecules seek freedom, say what they want and do what they want. It is very rare to know that molecules are quiet and slow to write a book, and their greatest characteristic is “no” and their greatest characteristic is “flowering everywhere”。
By contrast, the known molecules are hybrids, everything is well known, and the search for the breadth and speed of information. It is not necessary to sit for 10 years, but it is necessary to know the number and type of bench in a timely manner. They're like, "well, there's four words for the bean, you know?" the intellectuals are often experts in a given field, seeking depth beyond the breadth, and are those who dig wells within knowledge systems. They like to ask, "why did apples go?"
Hsui chi has always recognized himself as a public intellectual, despite the stigma attached to the term。
You know the molecules are anxious to know what it is and what it says. Intellectuals are more concerned about “why” “what else” and even “what to say”. To look less harshly, intellectuals and knowledgeable people are presented to different degrees and different degrees of knowledge acquisition by people with different intellectuals and choices. Those who study time history or quantum physics do not have to wonder for a moment how many words there are。
But intellectuals are traditional. “our country always defines intellectuals by a certain level of education, and foreigners do not think so.” wang xiaobo wrote in "china's intellectuals and china's legacy": "i still don't know exactly who's an intellectual and who's not. When i was studying in the united states, i spoke to the united states, who thought that engineers, dentists, etc. Were professionals, not intellectuals, and intellectuals were those who worked in universities or research departments and who did not sit and did not earn much. According to this standard, china is still some intellectual.”
He also quoted several definitions of “intellectuals”: “on one occasion, the new york times defined intellectuals, and i dare not quote them, because that criterion referred to a `critic society', so that there were few or no intellectuals in china. There's another definition that i'm not sure i'm sure it's in a free press. By that standard, all intellectuals live in the village of greenwich in new york, cynical, eccentric and everyone thinks they are the last intellectual in the world. So we should define the current intellectuals by the measure of a idle or teaching post in order to compare.”
Wang xiao bo in america。
Chinese intellectuals do not necessarily go to the village of greenwich in new york. They either follow the spirit of “independence, the idea of freedom” in the book, or live in microblogging (social media) and in public view, speaking out and becoming “common sense defenders” at any time. In their eyes, even known as known molecules, there are no more than three points less than intellectuals. They insist on knowing, first of all, common sense。
Where are the intellectuals? In one book, the intellectuals of contemporary society are clearly addressed in their definition: “defining intellectuals is not what they do, but how they behave, how they perceive themselves, and the values they defend”. And us chancellor richard posner, in public intelligents – a study of decline, has scorned public intellectuals and intellectuals active in the american media for centuries – perhaps also known as “knowers” – no less powerful than wang soo’s “knowers.”。
Richard posner。
In china, choi yong won used to talk about intellectuals like this: “i divided china's current intellectuals into three categories: one called shooting; one called being clean; and the other called following the waves. From a historical point of view, what is most needed is the intellectuals who took the scene. I've always wanted to be a guy who started a crime, but people like that need to know more than blood. I think i have enough blood, i don't have enough knowledge, i don't have enough knowledge, i can't speak forever, i can't, but at least i can shoot the table.” this powerful voice is being spread over social media。
One painter said, "i never recognized me as an intellectual because i was not educated. And then i tried to become a known molecule, and i felt it was not easy to become a known molecule... Do you think you're intellectuals or intellectuals?"
This self-righteous scorn is like woody allen's film, while intellectuals laugh at intellectuals. It is a tradition of knowing the intelligence of molecules and of intellectuals. Or more like a voice of the wise。
Little new recommendation
There's no shortage of games in china
Why does straight guy love qiu sook-jin
