Does practice go ahead of theory, or does theory go ahead of practice?

Practice is ahead of theory, and theory can guide practice. Through practical activities, summarize the results and lessons learned, obtain a series of theories, and then use these theories to further practice.

Practice is based on theory, so theory precedes practice.

It's like we usually say: do things with a plan. There is also a reason why when building or decorating a house, it is also the design of existing drawings, and then it is a reason to start construction.

It should be practice and exploration, ahead of theory.

Theoretical knowledge comes from the soil of practice, not the product of theoretical researchers behind closed doors. Without a practical foundation, it can only be built in the air, and in the end it becomes empty talk, and its results and its value are inevitably questioned. From another point of view, "theory guides practice", especially philosophical theory, which has an impact on practice at all levels.

Therefore, theory and practice rely on each other, are inseparable, and complement each other.

Practice and theory go hand in hand, not who is ahead of whom. If there is a theory first, then the correctness of the theory can be proved by the practical action through the theory; If production can be improved in the process of practice, then a new theory will be formed, and this theory will be constantly improved, so that theory and practice can develop together.

Of course, theory is ahead of practice, only with a certain theoretical foundation, can we better practice, such as repairing machines, only by knowing how the machine works, how to combine, when repairing, can we disassemble and assemble ourselves faster and more accurately to judge the problem.

I don't think so, I think practice should take precedence over theory. Theory is often only used as an assistant to assist the smooth progress of practice. You see, at that time, during the time of our Hemudu people, their thinking was so backward.

But it is possible to grow and discover the laws of rice cultivation, why is that? Because they have discovered the law through many practices, and then established theories. At that time, the Peking ape people also discovered the fire, which was also through many practices to discover the law.

Therefore, I can conclude that the theory is that the pattern was discovered through many experiments. The theory thus established, and the theory can only be an auxiliary to assist the smooth operation of practice. What you just said is biased, what you said is to establish a goal and an ideal, which has nothing to do with theory, our theory is rigorous and rigorous, and the goal you said is only single.

And it is always a hypothetical theory that has not been proven in practice. It can't be called a theory.

Practice always goes ahead of theory. Because only when practice is ahead of theory, then your theory is correct and can withstand the scrutiny of anything. If your theory goes to the front, then maybe your theory is wrong.

Practice should be ahead of theory, and only when you practice can you discover some problems in your theory and improve it, which is very helpful to your practice.

Practice is ahead of theory, and theory is to summarize practice so that latecomers can grasp it faster, rather than slowly exploring through practice, and practice is also the only truth to test theory.

This is complementary, but the theory in the book will make you understand what you should do, what you should find, and then practice, and confirm your theory through practice, and then let you grow, theory is to help you lay the foundation, and practice is to push you forward.

Of course, theory is in front of practice, and only the foundation of theory can be better used in practice, and only with the foundation can it be better played in practice, so theory should be in front of practice.

Theory is ahead of practice, because when you do something, you must first have a plan and intention, which is theory, and then you can do it according to your own theory, and there is a sequence.

Does practice go ahead of theory, or does theory go ahead of practice? Of course, theory is ahead of practice, only with a certain theoretical foundation, in order to better practice, such as repairing the machine, only by knowing how the machine works, how to combine, repair can be faster and more accurate disassembly, judge the problem by yourself, and theory and practice are complementary to each other.

It should be practice, ahead of theory. Only through continuous study and exploration can we apply theory to practice. Only by gradual exploration can the theory be brought into full play.

Therefore, just like building a house and laying the foundation, it is necessary to do a good job in practice. In order to correctly grasp the theory. If you just talk about theory and don't put it into practice, then Zhao Kuo is talking on paper.

Of course, practice is in the comprehensive form of theory, because practice produces true knowledge, and theory is the summary and induction of practice.

Personally, I think the logical relationship between the two concepts is like this:

All theories need to be practiced before they can be truly confirmed or falsified;

Many practices, on the other hand, do not necessarily need theoretical support. The results of practice can be right or wrong.

There is no theory, and it does not prevent practitioners from trying)

Therefore, most of the time, theory will be ahead of practice, but it will not have much influence before practice;

If practice is ahead of theory, then it may be good luck by chance; It may also be because after several failures, trial and error, finally fit into a certain law (i.e., theory) that has not yet been discovered.

From the perspective of historical development, theory is ahead of practice, for example, Marxist theory comes before the practice of the Communist Party.

Does practice go ahead of theory or does theory go ahead of time? This must be that theory is ahead of time, and it is necessary to prove the correctness of the original signal of his theory through practice.

Practice should be guided by theory that follows theory, so that time can be put into action more quickly. With correct theory and practice, there will be no more detours, so theory should be ahead of practice.

Theory should be ahead of time, and only theory should guide practical theory. The better you do, the less detours you will take and the better you can get to your destination. Practice is the only criterion for testing the truth, but only with theory can we better guide the direction of practice.

Personally, I think that practice should go behind theory, and only with reasonable theory can we identify the truth of theory through practice. to save time.

Of course, theory is ahead of practice, and practice is carried out after theory.

In the vast majority of cases, practice is ahead of theory, because it is only through practice and then through summarization and induction that theory can be formed, and without practice, theory cannot be talked about.

Theory is in front of practice, which may be better, and some theoretical foundations are easier and easier to learn.

It should be that practice is ahead of theory, and without practice there can be no theory, and only practice can support theory.

From theory to practice, this is a very long-term process, I have been studying psychology recently, and I found that it is still okay to lecture, but the practical application is too far, but it is still a little useful, but it is still difficult to really complete it according to theory and practice.

From theory to practice, this bend is a process that requires repeated practice, just like sports, repeated practice until the formation of thinking memory, which is a boring and tedious process, which may have little effect at first, but will achieve a qualitative leap in the later stage.

Therefore, from theory to practice, whether it is psychological and behavioral training in Lishan or physical exercise, it needs to be adhered to for a long time.

Theory is the foundation of practice, and practice is the foundation of theory. Practice plays a decisive role in theory. Theory has a counter-effect on practice, scientific theories have a positive guiding effect on practice, and erroneous theories have an obstructive effect.

Theory and practice complement each other and are indispensable, and we cannot arbitrarily sever the dialectical relationship between the two and emphasize one aspect in isolation.

The viewpoint of practice is the core viewpoint of Marxist philosophy. Marxism holds that all social life is practical in nature, and the subject of practice is a person with a certain ideological understanding. People's correct thinking comes from practice, and practice determines understanding, which is the source and motive force of understanding, the goal and the destination, and is also the only criterion for testing whether understanding is correct or not.

Cognition has a counter-effect on practice, correct understanding promotes correct practice, and wrong understanding leads to wrong practice. This is the dialectical relationship between practice and understanding, and it is also a basic principle of Marxist philosophy.

Marx once pointed out in the Introduction to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law: Of course, criticism cannot replace criticism, and material forces can only be destroyed by material forces, but once theory masters the masses, it will also become material forces. As long as theory convinces people, it can grasp the masses; And as long as the theory is thorough, it can convince people.

The so-called thoroughness is to grasp the root of things. But the essence of man is man. (Selected Works of Marx and Engels, vol. 1, p. 9).

The philosophical idea embodied in Marx's famous quote is the relationship between theory and practice. There are two main sentences in the discourse, namely, "criticism cannot replace criticism" and "once theory is grasped by the masses, it will become a material force". These two sentences have two meanings: the former is to say that "theory cannot replace practice," and the latter is to say that "theory has a guiding role in practice."