news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

teachers’ day has just passed, and the ink on the document “promoting the spirit of educators” has not yet dried, and a video related to “teachers” has become a hot topic.

in the video, a parent called the teacher and said that he had placed the teacher's day gift at the fruit shop at the entrance of the community and asked the teacher to pick it up. the teacher responded, "i'm sorry you are so polite." the parent replied, "it's okay, it's okay."

another video posted by the parent showed that the parents waited for the teacher to come. the video captured a man taking two bags of gifts and putting them into a private car.

watching these two videos separately, they seem to be nothing special, but when you watch them together, they are very interesting. at the very least, it is a bit like "fishing enforcement", and at the most, it is a bit...

"teacher's day", "receiving gifts", "setting up a trap"as soon as these words came out, the popularity reached its maximum.

on september 12, a staff member of hefei no. 6 middle school, where the teacher worked, told reporters that it was true that the teacher accepted gifts. whether it was a "setup by parents" is under investigation.

hello everyone, i am yuan fang, today we will talk about:

"reporting a teacher" is not illegal, but human nature always...

when this incident happened, public opinion online became somewhat complicated.

as to whether teachers should accept such expensive gifts, everyone is relatively unanimous in their opinion. teachers should not accept such expensive gifts. at the same time, everyone's opinions are quite divided on the parents' behavior of "setting up a trap to report".

some supporters of the parents’ approach said:

"finally someone has spoken up! this gift-giving trend must be stopped."

"support the parents! if you are not greedy, no matter how bad you are or how much you set up the scheme, it will be useless! bribers are hateful, but those who accept the bribes are even more hateful! otherwise, wouldn't the corrupt officials be innocent?"

"collect evidence skillfully, punish corruption, and support parents!"

some people who oppose the parents’ approach say:

"this is too insidious. you can choose not to give gifts, but you shouldn't frame the teacher in this way.

"the teacher is definitely wrong, but the parents' actions are too sinister. human nature cannot stand the test."

"fishing for gifts is intentional and tarnishes the image of teachers. they must be severely punished!"

what do you guys think about this?

regarding this matter, yuan fang had a lot to say at the beginning, but after thinking about it, only three questions were left, waiting for friends to leave messages and answer them.

first of all, if teachers are allowed to “accept gifts”, where is the “limit”?

in this video, the teacher "accepted" such "expensive" gifts as wuliangye and "lamer", which are estimated to be worth several thousand yuan. most people feel that this is "over the line".

what if the gift is erguotou and dabao worth less than 100 yuan? is it against the rules?

if a teacher goes to a "fruit shop" and weighs out a bag of fruit, is it against the rules?

what if the fruit weighed is a "peach that costs 500 yuan", is it against the rules?

secondly, if “fishing enforcement” is possible, where is the “limit”?

i saw someone leave a comment on the news, "we have to use this special method, we have to go to extremes to correct the wrongs, in order to severely curb the evil trends." if "fishing enforcement" is acceptable, then where is the limit?

even if we elevate this news to the level of "corruption and bribery", we can use fishing enforcement to oppose corruption and bribery; we can use fishing enforcement to crack down on pornography and illegal publications; we can use fishing enforcement to crack down on extracurricular tutoring (this is a true story); and we can also use fishing enforcement to request that taxi drivers not use the meter.

so here comes the question,"spend"where? how wide can the scope of "fishing enforcement" be applied? if you take a taxi without wearing a seat belt, can you report the driver for "breaking the law" and ask for the fare to be waived?

finally, let us ask ourselves, how much test can human nature withstand?

i've heard of one before."unlock"the story left a deep impression on me.

one day, zhang san locked himself out of his house. so he called a locksmith, who opened the lock in a few seconds. zhang san was surprised at how insecure the lock was.

seeing zhang san's surprised expression, the locksmith explained:

"locks only protect against gentlemen, not villains. 1% of people are always honest and will never steal; another 1% are always dishonest and will always find ways to pick your lock and steal your tv; the rest of the people would not steal under normal circumstances, but if they are tempted enough, they will become dishonest. locks do not protect against thieves, because if thieves really want to break into your house, they can do it with locks; locks really protect against those who are honest most of the time, but may steal when your door is unlocked."

these 98% of people are immoral, and they are not the kind of people who will cheat if they get the chance. they may just be the ones who need to be supervised to ensure that they do not go astray.

then let us ask ourselves, what kind of people are we, and how much of a test can we withstand?

……

now that i have asked the three questions, i hope you will leave your answers.

although elements has no answers to these three questions, it has gradually figured out one thing over the past two years:

a good society strives to magnify the goodness and subjective initiative in human nature;

a bad society strives to magnify the evil and risk appetite in human nature...

many times, what turns a country into a living hell is precisely what people try to turn it into a paradise.