Cross examination of a soldier who is not quite a general is not a good soldier s defense

1 Do soldiers do the same job as generals? Yes -> then what do you want a general for?

2 Is a general sure to do a good job as a soldier? Yes - > then why do you need soldiers?

3 Therefore, generals and soldiers are two different types of people, and those who always think about how to do the work of others will not be able to do their own work.

Reasoning with different classifications is logically confusing, and it is right to say that a soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier.

Well, it's right that a driver who doesn't want to be a tailor isn't a good cook.

They're all generals, who's going to charge?

Do you want both positive and negative materials?

Well, let's look at the square first:

A soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier".

It is important to describe "wanting to be a general" as having "big ideals" – because the other side will almost certainly accuse him of being "not down to earth".

Then, try to talk about the power of "ideals" and "examples".

In the meantime, to give you an example::

Confucius, in order to earn a living, worked as a storekeeper (a national civil servant at that time), but he was not satisfied with the status quo, and for his own work, he just completed it properly, and did not spend too much time, but spent his time on his higher goals.

Imagine that if Confucius was content with the status quo and only thought about "being a good soldier" and did not have the idea of "being a general", he could indeed spend a lot of effort to study how to be a good storekeeper, and maybe he could indeed become the number one storekeeper in the country, but no one of us today will know about Confucius...... person

In fact, there are very, very, very many examples, and the reason why I give such "off-the-shelf" examples is to help you develop your ideas and make the other party unable to prevent them.

Next, let's talk about the opposite:

generals, with the qualities of generals; Soldiers, there are soldiers' specialties.

The so-called "will be in the plot but not in the brave".Generals, they must have wise minds, calm judgment, and more importantly, strategic vision, but they do not have to be able to shoot targets or fight bayonets.

Therefore, Zhuge Liang, who is powerless, can be a general, but he is definitely not a good soldier - in history, Zhuge Liang used to be the "military general" of Shu, which is probably equivalent to the current chief of general staff (pay a little attention to this, [general], not a military general, civilian personnel can also be generals).

However, as a soldier, there are areas that a soldier must specialize in, and a soldier cannot always think of being a general, otherwise it is impossible to train the skills of a soldier - the two fields are different.

Whether it is a good general or a good soldier, first of all, you must do your job well, and if you don't focus on your job, how can you calculate it well? !

We are not preventing soldiers from having higher ideals and aspirations, but we are saying that only when we are down-to-earth and do our duties well are good soldiers.

If you are a good soldier, you will naturally have the opportunity to become a lieutenant or a colonel, step by step, and in the whole process, there are still many items to learn and train, and only after becoming a good mid-level officer should you aim for a general.

Directly wanting to be a general, wanting to ascend to the sky in one step is not an ideal, it is a fantasy. A soldier who likes to fantasize, I'm afraid he can't say that he "does his job".

A soldier who wants to be an officer can be a good soldier, and an officer who wants to be a general can be a good officer. But a soldier who is directly quite a general, is not a good soldier.

A soldier who doesn't want to be a general is not a good soldier, and that's still a wise saying. There is no rush to dare to think and say.

energy, there is no vitality of young people and more old-fashioned. When we become the attention of the people.

Home"It means that the society recognizes that we have become talents, and talents are always better than mediocre talents to society.

Contribution is even greater, although not everyone can be a general, but if you work with this belief, you can be 200 out of 100.

Get the job done.

Ideals and goals are the guiding light on the long journey of life, and the guiding light at the crossroads of life. I can't imagine that a soldier who doesn't even dare to think of being a general has other grander and more lofty ideals. I can't imagine that a soldier who doesn't even dare to think of being a general can call him a good soldier, and Napoleon said something like this:

A soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier"."Indeed, if a soldier becomes a general, he has the opportunity to serve the country, if he doesn't want to be a general, doesn't he just don't want to serve the country, contribute to the country, and contribute to the nation? Is this person really not as rational as a draft?

Grinding ants. Only a strong belief can inspire the enthusiasm for life and the persistence of dreams, and only with self-confidence, we can rely on our own strength to build a strong faith.

Hehe, this debate is always right with only one side, like "money is not everything", alas, tragedy is always tragedy, even if your debate is really high.

First, you must be brave to speak, have a clear mind, and be flexible in your thinking.

Third, you have to face the audience and communicate with the people below.

Doing these three points is what the debate is about.

It can be debated from:

1. People can't be greedy, they always want to do one thing, but do you have a job, they always want to do it, it is not the same as doing it.

2, this goal is too long-term, the soldier is followed by the captain, and the captain is followed by the platoon commander....The target is too high and far away, and it will be a blow in the long run.

Causes depression. (e.g., the story of the Japanese marathon).

3. Not everyone who buys a lottery ticket can win a million jackpots, and the military is even more so, which has to go through layers of selection and assessment, and cannot be ideologically.

Aggressive, too advanced thinking will have a certain impact on oneself and the army. (e.g. on paper.) There is no correct estimate since.

F, finally....This is the result of always wanting to be a general without proceeding from reality)

4. The duty of a soldier is to obey orders, and a soldier lacks the function of command, and ideals must be combined with reality, and cannot be delusional, this sentence.

If it is changed to "a soldier who does not want to be a commander is not a good soldier", and then "a commander who does not want to be a general is not a good commander", it is obvious.

Yes, this is a progressive relationship, and this progressive relationship cannot be changed.

Napoleon's classic saying: "A soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier", I don't know how many people have been inspired to work hard and succeed. The world is vast and vast, how many mediocre people have achieved nothing, how many ordinary people who have a dull life, and how many successful and unswerving people, but the reason for chasing it is nothing more than whether to be a general, a soldier or a deserter.

The purpose of writing this ** is not absolute, it is more to motivate young children to have goals from an early age and work hard for them, even if he does not want to become a "general", after all, there are few "generals", only if the "general" becomes the "supreme commander", there will be more "generals".

In the past, we always used "a soldier who doesn't want to be a general is not a good soldier" to motivate people to have ideals and fighting spirit, and not to be confused, and at the same time use this sentence to criticize those who are "honest and honest, and keep to themselves" (that is, people who finally do their duty and will not overstep their responsibilities and think about what is wrong). But I realized today that we were all wrong—because only a soldier who doesn't want to be a general is a good soldier.

In this society where everyone has become impetuous, we have "soldiers who want to be generals", and what is lacking is precisely "soldiers who don't want to be generals". Think about it, aren't those ** who don't care about the lives of the people for the sake of political achievements just "want to be generals"? Aren't those scholars and researchers who plagiarize ** for the sake of academic titles, lie about scientific research achievements, etc., all "want to be generals"?

Why is society impetuous? It is because there are too many "people who want to be generals", there are few people who keep to themselves in a consistent society, and everyone is vying to be a "general" instead of a "soldier", can such a society not be impetuous?

It's better to have more "soldiers" and fewer "generals"! The times need "soldiers"!

Napoleon is often quoted: a soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier. Is that so?

It seems that it is precisely because you want to be a general that you will perform well, strive for meritorious service, and continue to be proactive. But if you want to be a general, you go to the leader to flatter you, and you compete with other comrades-in-arms for merit, so you only stare at it and don't look at it, so is he still a good soldier? In the same way, isn't an official who doesn't want to be a big official a good official?

Is an official who thinks about how to be a big official every day a good official? Isn't a teacher who doesn't want to be a professor a good teacher? Apparently not.

An old lecturer at Shanghai Jiaotong University was deeply liked by students, and he was still a lecturer until he finally passed away; Zhang Side, a veteran, has always been a good example for our whole party to learn from. From this point of view, a soldier who does not want to be a general is not necessarily not a good soldier, the key is to be able to do our own work well, all walks of life will make achievements, can realize their own value, always thinking about climbing up is not a good thing.

Since the other side's argument is that "a soldier who does not want to be a general is not a good soldier", then we only need to point out the theories and examples of the existence of good soldiers who do not want to be generals, and we can also expand on some to counter the other side, and throw out the thesis that "just trying to be a general cannot become a good soldier".

To figure out a few questions, what is a good soldier? The role and relationship of the general and the soldier?

A good soldier should be a soldier who can resolutely carry out the tasks assigned, be loyal and fearless, and be able to cooperate with his comrades to cover, so from this point of view, a good soldier and wanting to be a general are two different things, wanting to be a general can only show that the soldier himself is enterprising, but not the soldier's own military quality and development potential. A general refers to a commander, who is the core of the army's command decision-making, and his decision-making determines the victory or defeat of a war. However, not everyone can be a general, if "being a general" is just a yearning for status, not the envy of becoming an outstanding talent, if you just blindly want to climb up, it can only make people become unscrupulous, "good soldiers" will become "bad soldiers" if they don't do well, and becoming a general is also a "bad general", it is better not to want to be a general.

Everyone has to be a general, so who will be a soldier? Isn't that messy? A truly good soldier is a true soldier who truly fulfills his duties.

Everyone wants to be a general, who else can do their own thing in a down-to-earth manner, how can such an army be united?

Being a general is just to give the soldier a fierce and the soldier a goal.

Everything you do must have a goal, so that you will not lose your way.

The main argument of the opposing side should be that there is too much difference between a soldier and a general, many soldiers do not understand the general at all, and they are not qualified for the general's job at all, the so-called thinking is just an ethereal fantasy, if you always think about these unattainable things, and do not base yourself on your own position, then even the soldier is not good, not only makes being a general a delusion, but also may achieve nothing.

Don't say things like "a soldier can't be a general."

If you want to be, you can't, you can't always want to be, and those who always aspire have no ambition.