After reading the 17th issue of the debate, I finally rekindled my fondness for Qi Pao a few years ago. It is not an exaggeration to describe it as "a fight between gods" on the Internet, haha. Personally, I really want such a chip for sharing knowledge, so much so that I couldn’t stop complaining while watching the first and second debates of the opposing side... From the opening of the debate to Chen Ming, the positive side defined the knowledge in the chip as "information." and the induction and summary of objective facts" is well established in this scope, which is very helpful for later refuting the views such as "the sharing of knowledge creates uniformity" and "chips replace thinking ability". I was amazed by Zhan Qingyun's perspective that "chips allow others to decide what knowledge is for you, and the process of acquiring knowledge and the ability to select information are more important." Unfortunately, the premise that chips represent "indiscriminate processing and application of knowledge" has not been established, and it is very difficult to Soon the other party took advantage of it and turned it into his own use.
If there really is such a chip, you can know astronomy and geography from an early age, be familiar with society and humanities, and master function equations, and you can still retain your own value orientation and choose according to your own will. What kind of knowledge should be used, when should it be used, and where should it be used? Why not support this kind of thing that is of great benefit to oneself? Don't say it's useless to know too much, it sounds like anti-intellectualism. When I was a child, I was ignorant and was forced to memorize "Withered Vine and Old Tree and Dark Crow". When my boss was wandering, he heard the song of birds and suddenly got the same emotional resonance as Ma Zhiyuan. This is the value of ancient poems in your mind. If I knew more about the debate at this moment, the contestants’ speeches would definitely shake me even more. I wouldn’t have to go to Baidu to find out what “technology neutrality” means after reading it... If chips can make all human brains knowledge* **Enjoy, regardless of age or class, people have the same knowledge reserves. The reduction of inequality and contempt will also help people accept more diversified ideas and break the control brought by knowledge monopoly. Only then can we stand in front of giants. The shoulders develop more efficiently. As for what Xue Zhaofeng said about the knowledge monopoly patent system to avoid inefficiency and waste, I think the benefits dragged down by the swarm should not be underestimated compared to the greatly increased probability of research and development success that chips have enabled mankind.
It was not surprising that the affirmative side won, but it was not until the end when Ma Dong said the sentence "Facts do not please people" that he realized why this debate was really difficult for the opposing side. Thinking back from the beginning, an omniscient chip needs to be constantly updated. Where does the knowledge come from? When humans looked up at the stars for the first time, we began to be curious, began to explore, and began to have civilization, that is, knowledge comes from the unknown. Omniscient chips may simply eliminate the possibility of pursuing knowledge. Cai Kangyong said that the enthusiasm for preserving knowledge comes from the oppression of knowledge. This sentence seems to be turning against the necessity of supporting knowledge monopoly. Reducing the cost of acquiring knowledge is not always a good thing. Let me first say that "knowledge is meaningless without trade-offs." Just like the exaggeration of knowledge anxiety on the Internet today, many people blindly buy paid knowledge products, as if they have already acquired the knowledge and improved their abilities. When you have a How many people will remember to improve their personal thinking ability if a chip possesses the knowledge of all mankind without any cost or even internal consumption? Now imagine the changes in class stratification. Absolute equality does not exist. A stable society is composed of the vast majority of entertainment masses and a small number of elite managers. The discriminating function of knowledge cultivation disappears, and the channels for class advancement seem to become narrower. . What is unavoidable is that, apart from idealistic veils such as peace and progress, driven by greed, anger and ignorance in human nature, the benefits brought by the monopoly of knowledge cannot guarantee the sustainable development of knowledge. scene.
I still remember that Huang Zhizhong once pointed out that when the descendants of heroes bear the shadow of great men, he was criticized by Gao Xiaosong for being too dark. Maybe Zhan Qingyun and Xue Zhaofeng's speeches were also limited by the reason of "not spreading negative energy". After all, Chen Ming The beautiful world described by Cai Kangyong was all moved by the audience. Reality can't be discussed one way or another, but debate can, so just keep a dream.