After reading the comments from the last comments, I realized that I had made another serious mistake.

I feel that I cannot write the "principles" perfectly, and even think that the principle is too great. I, an ordinary person, have no confidence to write and are very unconfident, so I am writing the "principles".

It eventually caused misunderstandings, making readers think that "Eternal Fire believes that stories and truths are incompatible."

In fact, I think principles and stories are difficult to compatible, and truth and stories are the perfect combination.

Let’s throw away the theme first. The core of this book has always been the principle, not the truth.

The truth and principle have never been the same thing.

This is my mistake. I failed to clarify the boundaries between these two words in the book and in the comments.

The truth and principle are concepts that have intersections but are completely different.

The reason is that this word basically has three meanings.

1. Things, rules, and reason in life.

2. A deeper meaning is also "the law of things".

3. In ancient classics, the deepest meaning of truth is also the principle of the birth of Tao, and it is the additional attribute of the great Tao. No one can understand this thing. Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching has countless interpretations, and there is no absolutely authoritative interpretation, so don't tell me which novel author can write this truth.

So, in fact, there are only the first two meanings.

The most commonly used contexts of truth are almost all of the existence of "fuzzy perception" in terms of feeling, experience, instinct, common sense, life, etc.

To give the simplest example, Pythagorean theorem.

One, truth:

Now, a 3-cm wooden strip and a 4-cm wooden strip are arranged at a right angle, so an adult told the child that the third wooden strip can form a right triangle in just 5 cm.

When the child asked why, the adult said, this is the Pythagorean theorem. If the two right-angled sides of a right angle are 3 and 4, then the oblique side is 5.

This is the truth. You can vaguely perceive and know that this is the case. In essence, it is "what is this".

[Recommended, Wild Fruit Reading and Chasing Books is really useful, download here www. You can try it quickly.]

There are also some simple principles in daily life, such as if it rains on cloudy days, people should study hard, and the soil can feed crops. These are all the reasons.

Two, theorem:

The child further asked, what is the Pythagorean theorem?

So, the adults used various methods to prove the Pythagorean theorem.

So the question is, who can use the story to prove the Pythagorean theorem?

I don't think anyone can do it at the moment, nor have anyone done it.

If I went back to ancient times and wrote a refreshing plot where the protagonist proves the Pythagorean theorem, then, I would like to ask, is it because the Pythagorean theorem itself that makes the readers happy, or because the story makes the readers happy?

Will readers prove the Pythagorean theorem after they feel happy because of the story?

The Pythagorean theorem seems not difficult to prove, so let's replace the Pythagorean theorem with Fermat's Grand Theorem.

What is the result? The result is that readers do not understand Fermat's theorem, and even suspect that the author may not be able to truly understand it, but they can understand the "reason" that "the protagonist proves Fermat's theorem can shock the academic community", so they feel good.

The reader is so happy because the truth in the story is so good that he still cannot understand Fermat's theorem and will not feel any pleasure from this theorem.

Theorem is "why of a thing".

So, what is the principle?

Three, principle

The principle is why, and it is the law of the laws of things.

The most rigorous way to prove the Pythagorean theorem needs to be applied to axiomatics, which is like the content in "The Origin of Geometry".

All theorems should come from axioms.

The first principle I mentioned repeatedly in the article is very clear, which is the most core, indispensable and undeniable fundamental proposition in each discipline.

Fourth, what is the most important thing?

The most important thing is that truth can be perceived, vaguely realized in life, and can be completely integrated into the story, because the story and truth are perceived, instinctive, empirical and "experienceable".

Reading novels and watching videos is essentially about humans using their bodies and brains to experience or simulate experiences. They are completely physical reactions. Even emotions are mainly the effects of nerves and neurotransmitters.

However, the principles are different.

Principle is completely beyond the perception of human bodies. This thing itself cannot be determined by humans. When Lao Tzu said "Tao", when Heraclitus said "Logos" and other Greek philosophers talked about the "original origin of all things", this thing began to brew.

Only then do we realize that there is an indescribable thing in this world, and that thing is the "first driving force" of this world, which can be called the origin or the great way.

Then, this great way, this origin, and this first driving force are the "first principle" of our entire universe.

But the problem is that this philosophical and perceptual "principle" is closer to a principle because it is too general.

We really understand by the standards that can be achieved if we understand it? We obviously don’t understand it.

The real principle is the foundation of the field of knowledge.

The three laws of Newton are the principles of classical mechanics.

Can anyone tell me how a novel author writes Newton's three laws into a story, and then lets children who have never learned Newton's three laws understand classical mechanics by reading the stories?

We can make up a story about an apple slamming Newton's head, allowing Newton to figure out the Three Newton's Laws, but the story itself cannot explain the Three Newton's Laws clearly. It is necessary to use "explanation" or even rigorous proof methods. In the eyes of many readers, this method is not a story, but a preaching.

The principle must have a rigorous proof process!

No reason.

Formally, because the principle requires a rigorous proof process, I said that the story is incompatible with the principle.

Principles and principles are things of two dimensions.

You can vaguely perceive the truth, but the principle is that you must give up your instinct and use human reason and thinking to touch it.

I wrote 3.7 million words, but I couldn't tell the readers the truth and principle. It was because my writing skills were insufficient. Sorry.

To put it simply.

The reason why I say that the book of the Gods is different is not because I am writing the truth, but because I am writing the principles.

Although I feel that I have not been able to write the principles well and have been using the principles to cover them up, I am indeed not writing the principles, but the principles.

Anyway, I don’t have any face anymore and I’m shameless and tell the truth. If there are still readers who can’t tell the truth and principles, and still think that the principles can be written in stories, then I can’t say anything.

So, you can say that Eternal Fire is so thick-skinned that he can even boast about writing principles.

You can also say that Eternal Fire does not understand the principles, but writes the principles, which is too arrogant and cannot be well written.

You can also say that the story written by this guy, Eternal Fire, is not well integrated into the truth.

You can also say that truth and story can be well integrated.

You can even say that someone can write principles into a story, which is your freedom, but I personally do not recommend saying this.

There may be some in the future, but there is really no now.

Even the science fiction masterpieces like "The Three-Body" and "I, Robot", the dark forest theory or the three laws of robot proposed by the proposed science fiction are countless dimensions away from the principle.

This article is just a rational discussion and does not involve anything else.

To make a metaphor:

After you finish speaking, you immediately feel that you understand.

After the principle is explained, you look confused and don’t know what you are talking about. You need to mobilize your brain to think slowly before you can fully understand and apply it.

Finally, I sighed, my writing ability really needs to be improved. I wrote 3.7 million words but failed to let readers understand that what I really wrote was actually the principle.

This is the biggest gain from my writing comments this time, and it is also a signal that I will continue to work hard to consolidate the foundation of writing.

Look, now I have the motivation to continue studying.

The final comment is over and no discussion will be made.

I have worked hard to study! I have manually slid my forehead with a red belt and a fist and a small expression!

For the new book!
Chapter completed!