It’s well-founded and correct, but it takes too long and has many problems. You can’t have both fish and bear paws; how can you combine things to achieve the best results?
Thread Content
To use an analogy: if you want to verify that a certain principle is correct, and most people’s experience suggests it is indeed correct, yet such empirical evidence lacks a scientific explanation and cannot be turned into a documented form, then one has to spend more time gathering additional information and references in order to conduct verification and calculations, and then produce a document or paper in a formal style – which is inefficient.
Theory must be linked to practice, and practice should guide theory. Summarizing is done in order to apply theory more effectively in practice; by summarizing, you come to possess the essence of both theory and practice. Do not underestimate this process of summarization!
Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth
It feels like this is similar to the current upgrades in the fine chemical industry – the underlying mechanisms aren’t clear and continuity is required. *In the past, all one needed was a workshop supervisor or technician to get things started, which made the process fast, efficient, and cost-effective
No problem, time needs to be allowed for; after all, this isn’t research.
No formal documents needed; just use determination, courage, persuasive words, and strong arguments to get the point across, then pat one’s chest and say, \"I’ll take responsibility if anything goes wrong.\"
There is a process from empirical verification to theoretical verification.
It is necessary to explain complex theoretical concepts in a simple and easy-to-understand manner, making them clear at a glance; understanding should be thorough, and the expression should be smooth.