Is it good to open the book or not necessarily to open the book?

It is often said, "It is good to open a book, but it is good to read a book." However, on closer examination, this statement is not entirely true. If we are interested in every book, then "open books are beneficial" is not necessarily beneficial.

Today's classmates may like to read martial arts, romance only **, books and periodicals, sometimes to the extent of forgetting to sleep and eating, and not letting go of the book, once they are lost in books, they will go crazy, then they only think about books in class, and they don't have the heart to study, and their grades will plummet. There are also people who are attracted by some of the plots in the book, imitate the characters in the book, and sometimes go down the path of crime. Isn't this a harm to yourself by reading books?

This is just the first layer included in "unbook is not necessarily beneficial": unbook is not necessarily beneficial. There is also a second floor.

The second is that we have to be selective when we read books. Don't read books that aren't healthy and don't help us much. If we want to read books, we should read some books that are conducive to our physical and mental health, and helpful to our study and life.

Such a book is a good book, and only by reading a good book will you not ruin yourself. Some people compare books to friends, reading good books, that is, making good friends, will progress; If you don't read a good book, of course, you will make friends with people who can't make friends, and then you will regress. Because those who are close to Zhu are red, and those who are close to ink are black!

So, only good books will be good for you. Therefore, my point is that open books are not necessarily beneficial.

I sincerely hope that every student can choose to read. And don't ruin your life by reading the wrong book, leading yourself astray.

Unbook is not necessarily beneficial. It is true that reading books can increase people's knowledge, cultivate their temperament, and cultivate their body and mind, but "opening the book" is only a necessary condition for "benefit", not a sufficient condition.

Liu Xiang of the Han Dynasty once said: "Books are like medicine, and good reading can cure foolishness." "Since books are medicines, they have two functions:

One is good medicine, medicine to get rid of the disease; One is poison, which kills people. Isn't it? In Germany in the 20s, many people were considered Hitler's martyrs because they watched Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and were badly influenced by it.

A bad book is like a bad friend, it can kill you." It's not false at all, now some students are obsessed with martial arts or romance**, reading those grotesque books all day long, and "throwing" their homework aside, resulting in a decline in academic performance, and finally creating a bamboo basket to draw water. Think about it, can it be said that "opening" such a book "volume" is "beneficial"?

A good book is better than a treasure, and a bad book is worse than a robber. Therefore, whether it is beneficial to open the book depends on what kind of book is opened.

A philosopher once said that people who are able to consume the necessary nutrients are healthier than those who eat a lot. At the same time, true scholars are often not people who read books, but people who can read. Some people don't think seriously when they read books, they just flip through the pages casually, some people read books that are not suitable for them, and some people even read books with a curious attitude.

The idiom "open book is beneficial" naturally has its positive meaning as an emphasis on the importance of reading, but it is inappropriate to use it as an assertion that "open book" is "beneficial".