厚黑学

When my friends talked about Darwin, they warned me, "Li Zongwu, you're good at telling me you've learned black, and you must not touch on the scope of science. Darwin is an expert in biology. His theory of provenance is based on decades of experiments, which have examined insects, plants, birds and animals one by one and proved good before it was published. You are not a scientist. It's better not to involve him, so as not to make jokes. I said, "Darwin can be called a scientist. Can't I, Li Zongwu, be called a scientist? Comparing the two, my learning ability is still above Darwin. Why? His theory of provenance is to illustrate the situation of the animal-animal society.

My theory of thick Mafia is to illustrate the situation of human society. He studies the animal-animal society, but only on the sidelines. He has not become an animal himself. Being with it, in the situation of the animal-animal society, I have become a person, and have been living with people for decades, isn't it? Is my education not far above Darwin? Darwin has found a principle in the animal-animal society. If it is used in the animal-animal society, we can ignore it. Now it is used in the human society openly. Of course, we can refute him. In the human society, we can find such scientists as Darwin, and in the animal-animal society, we can not find such scientists as Darwin, which is sufficient evidence. The two societies are quite different, so Darwin's theory does not apply to human society.

Nowadays, people often mention three scientists, who intimidate ordinary people of our generation, but they do not realize that scientists are wiser, 100 times wiser and confused than ordinary people, and also 100 times more confused than ordinary people. Newton is a unique scientist. He has two cats, big and small. He has a fateful craftsman who opens one or two holes in the door so that the big cat can enter the big hole and the little cat can enter the small hole. Anyone knows that a big hole, big and small cats can go in and out, and Newton does not understand, this is not a hundred times more confused than ordinary people? Newton said: The earth's heart has attraction, of course, we should obey, does he say that "big cats go in and out of big holes, small cats go in and out of small holes", we also believe it? Therefore, we must carefully select scientists and doctrines to guard against Newton's cat hole hidden in his doctrine.

Because scientists are sometimes a hundred times more confused than ordinary people, expert theories often fail, for example, is Smith not an economist, and his theories fail. My generation's words are not enough to prove. Are experts'criticisms not credible? Sorry, the gentlemen have ceased, the whole world has been disturbing, making unremitting noise, all Darwin, Smith... The gifts of scientists.

Darwin talks about competition. When he opens his mouth, he talks about jackals, tigers and leopards. When he opens his mouth, he talks about thick and dark. When he opens his mouth, he talks about Cao Cao, Liu Beiye and Sun Quan. Cao and Liu are outstanding people of all ages. Their civilization level is several times higher than that of jackals, wolves, tigers and leopards. However, the specimens I used alone are much higher than those collected by Darwin. So the world based on Darwin's theory is a tiger-wolf world. The world based on contemptible theory is a very civilized world. Darwin can be called a scientist. Of course, contempt can be called a scientist. But Darwin is a scientist of biology and a scientist of homophobia.

Darwin has studied biology for decades. He has studied insects, plants, birds and animals all over the world. There is only one high object in his laboratory that has not been studied, so his theory leaves a flaw. What are the higher animals? Answer: It is Darwin himself who neglects human society and his psychology and behavior. Therefore, there must be some flaws in the doctrine he created.

Darwin's laboratory, there is a higher animal, he has not studied, we may as well study for him. Darwin went to the ground all his life, we used the method of collecting animal specimens, we captured his son and mother alive to China, and fed him with Chinese white rice. We used Darwin's method of studying animals, from the bystander, we have been inspecting. When he dies of old age, we can see that his doctrine is contradictory.

Darwin dragged his mother's milk to eat, inhaled her blood into his abdomen, and if he did not eat it, he cried and estimated that he wanted to eat, which was a competition for survival. From this place, Darwin's theory was not wrong; when he grew up, he could eat something, and his mother took a cake in her hand, and he reached for it. When his mother refused to give him the cake, he put it in his mouth and left half of it out. He immediately reached out and took it out of his mother's mouth and put it in his mouth. When his mother took him to dinner, he reached out to drag his mother's bowl. If he was not careful, he would fall to the ground and break it.

This phenomenon was also a competition for survival. Darwin's theory was not wrong. If he was older, he could bring his own bowl to dinner. Once he came to the table, he handed an empty bowl, invited his mother to eat with him, and invited his mother to serve it. Is it not surprising that there is a bowl full of rice in front of him and he will never grab it again, and the phenomenon of competition will suddenly decrease? Again bigger, he will eat in the steamer himself, no longer with his mother, sometimes steamer lunch is not enough, he did not eat enough, keep his mother crying, his mother divided his rice bowl with him to eat, he will be well, his mother and him, he can not steal.

More importantly, the food was not enough. Mother shared her bowl with him. He didn't want it. He would buy food in the street with the money in his pocket. At this point, the phenomenon of competition, not at all, is not even more strange? When a child went down to the ground, he saw only the milk of his mother, the rice in his mother's bowl when he was older, the rice in his steamer when he was older, and the food in the street when he was bigger.

Not so, Darwin grew up to be a man and learned well. When he was a university professor and had a few relatives and friends who had loaned money to him, he gave it without hesitation, and later Jin. Isn't it strange that when money is abundant and money is used for charity or for public welfare, this phenomenon is completely contrary to competition? Here we can lay down a principle: "the same person, the more advanced the wisdom, the bigger the vision, the less competition." Darwin wrote a book that tells people only such things as estimating the mother's milk when a child is a child and robbing the mother's mouth of cake. He does not tell people such things as giving money when he is a professor, giving alms to his family and doing charity. This Darwinian theory should be revised.

Darwin grabbed food when he was a child. There was a certain rule: "If you are hungry, you grab it. If you are full, you don't grab it." Not only did he not rob him, but let him eat it. He did not eat it. But there is an exception. When he sees something delicious, his mother tells him not to eat more. He refuses to listen to it. As a result, he eats more than he can digest and suffers from a serious illness. Therefore, food should be limited to satiety, and excessive satiety is harmful. We can lay down the second principle: "Competition is based on the need for survival. If it exceeds the need, there will be disadvantages." Darwin only said that when children were young, they would grab food and grow fat. He did not say that because they had too much food, they would get sick. So Darwin's competition became unbounded or unbounded. Europeans believed in Darwin's theory and the world was in turmoil. This Darwin's theory should be revised.

Darwin said: "Everything is competing with each other. Different people need different food. The competition is not fierce. The closer the same kind is, the fiercer the competition is. The competition between tigers and cattle is not as fierce as that between tigers and tigers, between wolves and sheep, between wolves and wolves, between Europeans and scholars from other continents, and between European countries. It is true that his statement proves that the First European War was a good one, but Darwin himself destroyed it when he invented it. Darwin's biography says: "In 1858, his good friend Hollis sent a paper from South America, asking him to publish it for publication. Darwin read the paper exactly in line with the results he had worked hard for ten years, and he was very disappointed. For the sake of reputation, he must be jealous, or will annihilate his manuscript. Otherwise, Darwin will hand in this paper and publish it with Leer and Fuga.

They knew that Darwin also had such research on weekdays, and urged him to publish his research work as a paper. On July 1, 1858, it was published at the same time as Hollis's, so the scholars all over the country were astonished. This is what the biography says. The people who write for him praise him very much. In fact, they attack him. It's like saying: His doctrine can't be established at all. Why? He and Hollis are both Europeans, more similar than other continents, English, more similar than other Europeans. They are close friends, more similar than other English people, and more similar to people who study biology than other friends. Hollis'works, announced, are enough to take Darwin away.

Name, the most harmful to him, Darwin did not suppress him, instead declared for him, would not the more similar among the same kind, the less competitive it was? Darwin was an Englishman. Why did those Englishmen compete so fiercely in the European War when they could concede so much to their peers? We can lay down the third principle: "The people of the same country, the morally inferior, the closer to the same kind, the more competitive, the moral noble, the closer to the same kind, the more yielding." Darwin did not tell people what he had let Decorne do, but what his own country had done to invade the same kind of continent. This Darwinian theory should be revised.

Darwin said, "The more fierce the competition, the more likely it will be." This statement is unreliable. The first European War was fierce and unprecedented in history. Darwin: Which country is the most suitable for the outcome of this war? In fact, the losers and the winners of the war are all painful. Didn't his statement go unproven? But looking back Darwin did not compete with Hollis, but enjoyed the eternal fame, which was the most appropriate word. His example was also destroyed by himself. After his paper was published at the same time as Hollis, he continued to study it. In November, 1859, he published The Theory of Provenance, which has been famous all over the world. The name of Hollis is hardly known to anyone, because Darwin came back and worked harder than Hollis. We can come up with the fourth principle: "There are two ways to compete: the aggressor, the aggressor, the conflict everywhere, and the failure: the self-motivated, the conflict-free, the win-win." Darwin did not teach people the secret of his victory over Hollis, but praised the British method of plundering India. Four of these Darwinian theories should be revised.

Someone asked: I do not compete with others, others should use the strategy of power competition to attack me, what will I do? Answer: There are ways to do this. We can lay down the fifth principle: "In everything, we should give priority to our own interests. If we can't have both, we should benefit others without harming ourselves, or we can benefit ourselves without harming others." With this principle, people and both of us take into account, some people come to seize, I am determined to "do not harm themselves" to do three words, he can attack, I can defend, he can help me? This Darwinian theory should be revised in Five.

Darwin said that human evolution is due to competing with each other. From all aspects, we think that human evolution is due to mutual compromise. Because human evolution is due to joint efforts, mutual concessions, then each force line can move forward, the world can evolve. For example, if I want to hurry and walk on the road, and see someone bumping into me face to face, I should give in sideways so as not to delay my journey. According to Darwin, when people bump into each other, they should overthrow him to the ground. Someone bumps into him along the way, overthrows him along the way. When people crowded into a circle, I would break a path in the middle and move forward.

Excuse me, is there such a way for people traveling in the world? If we want to talk about "survival of the fittest", we must understand the principle of compromise. Only the fittest can survive. From Darwin's point of view, the biological world is full of competing phenomena. From our point of view, the biological world is full of conflicting phenomena. When we try to enter the forest, we can see that every tree has branches, leaves and branches, and all branches and leaves are developing in an empty place, ranking as one. Trees are ignorant things, they can give way to each other. It can be seen that giving way to each other is the natural nature of the biological world, because if they don't give way, they can't develop. All living things are alike. Birds and birds in the deep mountains sing together and animals gather in places where there are more peaceful moments and fewer struggles between them. When my generation's friends go back, they will have more peaceful times and fewer struggles with each other.

We can lay down the sixth principle: "In the biological world, the giver is always the giver, and the contender is the changer." Darwin took the variant as a rule. It seems that there is no right way. When things are conflicting, we should take the branches and leaves and move towards the empty space. Wang Meng saw Huan Yiwenyi, changed his position to Fan Qin, and Yun Shouping saw the mountains and rivers of Wang Shigu, and changed to learn a flower, all of which were so-called development to the empty space. In the big universe, there are many empty places, that is, there are many ways to survive. People do not have to compete with each other. Six of these Darwinian theories should be revised.

According to Darwin, all the powerful should survive, but in fact, the powerful should be destroyed first. In the time of flood and famine, there are tiger leopards everywhere. They are more powerful than human beings. They are suitable for human beings to fight against him. Why do tiger leopards disappear? Before the First World War, the German Emperor had the greatest power and was fit to be a hero in the world. Why would he fail instead?

Yuan Shikai has the greatest influence in China and should succeed. Why would he fail instead? With these facts, doubts arose about Darwin's doctrine. We carefully study that the destruction of tiger leopard is caused by all mankind, the failure of the emperor of Germany, the failure of the whole world, and the failure of Yuan Shikai, the failure of all China. Ideas are the same, they become the same direction of the joint force line, Tiger Leopard, Dehuang, Yuan Shikai, are also defeated by joint efforts. We can lay down the seventh principle: "Evolution is due to synergy." If you know how to work together, you will survive; if you violate it, you will eliminate it; if you know how to work together, you will win; if you violate it, you will lose. Observed like this, those who bully people with power are among the natural eliminations. This Darwinian theory should be revised by seven.

Darwin's mistake can be illustrated by a metaphor: if we tell people that biological evolution is like the growth of a child's body day by day. Someone asked, "How can a child grow up?" We answered, "As long as he does not die and survives, he will grow up naturally." Ask "How can I survive?" Answer: "As long as there is food to eat, you can survive." Question: "How can I eat?" Before we could answer, Darwin answered, "When you see someone else having a meal, you grab it. Naturally, there is a meal. The more you eat, the faster you grow."

You gentlemen try to see: Darwin's answer, is there anything wrong? In our research, Darwin said that there is nothing wrong with biological evolution, that there is nothing wrong with evolution because of survival, that there is nothing wrong with survival because of food, but in the last word, that food is wrong because of competition. We'll just correct his last sentence. Question: "How to correct it?" That's what we usually say: "Everyone has a meal to eat." To be fair, Darwinian competition has no limitations and inherent disadvantages. We teach others to compromise without limitations. Question: How can we avoid abuses? We can lay down the eighth principle: "Give in to each other so as not to interfere with my survival, to compete with others so that I can survive." This Darwinian theory should be revised eight.

To sum up, human beings evolved from one animal, and Darwin's public practice of "one animal society" was to return human beings to one animal. This is contrary to the theory of evolution, and it is not necessarily a pure competition between animals and birds. His theory can be divided into two parts. He said "biological evolution," which in part refers to the fact. He said that "competition for survival, the jungle prey", this part is to explain the reasons for evolution, the facts are not wrong, the reasons are wrong. Because the facts are good, ordinary people mistakenly think that the reason is also good, but they do not know that: the reasons for evolution are multifaceted, competition can evolve, let each other can evolve, do not fight, return to the internal, can also evolve. We can also evolve by competing and letting them develop in the empty space. It may have other conditions, such as what Krupotkin calls mutual assistance, or what we call collective effort, or evolution.

Darwin neglected all kinds of reasons. It was neglectful to observe that competition was the only reason for evolution. It is concluded that Darwin's invention of "biological evolution" is equivalent to Newton's invention of "geocentric attraction", which is a meritorious achievement in the academic circles for thousands of years. Only he said "competition for survival", so he advocated "the jungle preys on the jungle", which has endless abuses, and we have to repair it.