During the Three Kingdoms period, many famous people emerged. Through the portrayal in "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" and various novels, dramas, and films, these heroes have lived on from the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty to the present day. For example, there is Cao Boss, known as the "capable minister in times of peace and a cunning hero in times of chaos," there is Yu Liang, known for "making oars and masts fly in ashes with a laugh," and there is Yang Dezhu, known as "chicken ribs."
Regardless of historical facts or historical nihilism, just based on the plot of the TV series "The Great Strategist Sima Yi," Yang Xiu was destined to be killed from the beginning.
In the drama, Yang Xiu's first major scene is the evaluation of talents in the monthly court. This also laid the initial groundwork for the subsequent entanglement between Yang Xiu and Sima Yi. Sima Fu, the younger brother of Sima Yi, wrote a commentary on "The Book of Documents." After reading it, Yang Xiu, based on the opinion of the Confucian scholar Zheng Xuan, determined that the chapter "All Have One Virtue" in "The Book of Documents" was a forgery and concluded that Sima Fu's efforts were in vain. Sima Fu immediately retorted, "The chapter 'All Have One Virtue' has been in 'The Book of Documents' for a long time. How can you believe the words of one person and dismiss the entire chapter?" Yang Xiu disdainfully retorted, "Could Zheng Xuan be wrong?" After hearing this, Sima Yi not only disagreed with Yang Xiu's words but also defended his younger brother. He stepped forward and explained:
Can sages never make mistakes? The article "All Have One Virtue" means that the will of heaven is unpredictable, and those who serve the ruler should constantly cultivate virtue in order to maintain their position. If they stop cultivating virtue, they will lose their position. This is exactly the subtle meaning of Confucius' "Spring and Autumn Annals" and the main purpose of compiling "The Book of Documents," which is one of them.
After listening, Yang Xiu immediately replied:
Just because it conforms to the great meaning of the "Spring and Autumn Annals" does not mean that it is the original work of "The Book of Documents." Drawing arbitrary associations is not the way to study. It is good to have a broad desire for knowledge, but studying is a matter of accumulating knowledge and then applying it. Even if you can't have extensive knowledge and a good memory, you should not blindly follow the crowd and go along with popular opinions.
Sima Yi immediately gave a winning response:
In this chaotic era, most of the articles and documents have been lost. Our pursuit of knowledge is to reconstruct civilization from the remaining fragments, combining the spirit of the sages and the strategies that benefit the country and the people. It is not about cherry-picking and fighting with each other. This article can advise kings and teach the common people, and it should be passed down to future generations. How can the study of annotations be considered useless? The correctness of knowledge is not just about words, but also about attitude.
From this scene and dialogue, we can see that Yang Xiu is quick-witted but lacks independent thinking and critical thinking. From him, we can also see a common characteristic of many people in the world - blind faith in authority and "textualism."
In 2007, the iPhone was introduced, which profoundly changed industrial design, industrial aesthetics, and user preferences for terminal devices, to some extent accelerating the development of global mobile internet. Since then, Apple has gradually become a belief, an authority, and even in some less developed areas in terms of per capita income, a symbol of identity.
Since it has become a belief, there are naturally a group of people who worship it and cannot tolerate any criticism of Apple. If someone who criticizes Apple happens to be a user, they are immediately expelled from the fan base and even deemed unworthy of being called a person.
This allows Apple to repeatedly and successfully manipulate its users like vegetables. It has now expanded to the point where it declares war on human civilization in its latest advertisement.
As a practitioner in the film and television media industry, I can certainly see the metaphors that Apple wants to convey in this advertisement. However, compared to the visual elements that symbolize human civilization, these metaphors are not worth mentioning. Hydraulic presses crush musical instruments, game consoles, blackboards with formulas, globes, paints, sculptures... A company that claims to value inclusivity and diversity is trying to crush all of human civilization, which truly reflects its slogan "Think Different."
I want to ask Apple, is destroying everything really creation?!
In 2008, I owned my first Apple device, the iPod shuffle, and now I use the entire Apple ecosystem. I am a true old user. I have also watched and studied various types of Apple promotional and advertisement videos with my colleagues in my work. I never thought that Apple would create such a video that crosses the bottom line of cognition. I am deeply disappointed!
Perhaps Apple also wants to ask its users like Yang Xiu, "Am I wrong?" and "Don't just go along with the crowd and follow popular opinions," right?
Human civilization has developed to this day. It is the whisper of Socrates by the Aegean Sea, the pen of Laozi at the Hangu Pass, the colorful oil colors on Leonardo da Vinci's canvas, the jumping black and white keys on Beethoven's piano, the declaration written by Thomas Jefferson, the map drawn by Tim Cook, the ingenious calculations of Gauss, the grand conjectures of Einstein, and the unfinished chessboard of Turing.
Today's technology companies are not just manufacturers of products, but also shapers of civilization. Apple, as a giant in the technology industry, is promoting the concept of "destroying everything" in its latest advertisement, which makes people reflect: Is this the kind of innovation we expect? Is this kind of technology company truly benevolent? Can Apple represent the authority of innovation?
Technological development should be an accelerator of human civilization progress, not a destroyer. From the discovery of fire to the invention of the wheel, every technological leap has been made to better serve human life and improve its quality. When technology begins to try to define what is necessary cultural heritage, we may need to pause and reconsider our direction. In Apple's advertisement, the items symbolizing human civilization that are crushed by hydraulic presses are undoubtedly a strong visual impact. Behind this impact is also an extreme "Think Different" concept. However, "Different" should not be a negation of tradition. True creativity should be based on respect for and inheritance of tradition, and propose new solutions.
Every cultural element is the crystallization of human wisdom and deserves to be learned and respected by all humanity. The development of technology should not come at the expense of cultural diversity. As a global leading technology company, Apple's product design and marketing strategies undoubtedly influence the lifestyles and values of hundreds of millions of users worldwide. However, when this influence begins to tilt towards "defining everything," we must be vigilant. Technology should be open and inclusive. It should encourage creative thinking rather than confine everyone to a unified mindset.
In this rapidly changing world, every person is a participant and creator of civilization. Every technology we choose to use is not just a choice of tools, but also a reflection of cultural values. I hope Apple can rethink the cultural significance of its brand and products and truly become a force that promotes the advancement of human civilization, rather than attempting to destroy everything. Otherwise, Apple itself will be the first to perish.