I remember reading an article entitled "What is it and what should it be". I have no idea what this article said, but it really changed my thinking direction. After several years, these two concepts have been lingering in my mind. I also searched "ethics" for this.

When reading the Preface to Ethics, I remember this sentence: In order to make the group orderly and the individual happy, we must first understand "what is the fact" and then formulate a norm, that is, "what should the individual do".

In fact, three questions are not enough. We need to add one-what can we do?

? What's the truth? This is a question that can never get a unified answer. The so-called "what is the fact" only presupposes that the majority's * * * and identity are true, and then denies the minority's beliefs as a standard. Otherwise, the goal-"ordered group" cannot be achieved.

? This is a fact. Every group has the mainstream identity of "what is the fact".

So, what is the purpose? The purpose here is passive, because it is a group purpose, not an individual purpose. The purpose of the group is passive, and the purpose of the individual is active.

? Finally, it is "how to do it."

? I found it. Before me, someone found it.