The propaganda of the empire is just for the better development of the empire in this era, nothing more. When economy and science and technology became the measure of imperial power, vigorously developing economy and science and technology became the main theme of the times.

However, when everything is over the golden age of rapid development, perhaps environmental protection has become a more important thing, such as green mountains and clear waters are invaluable assets. Or, in other words, soft culture became an important criterion for the development of empires.

These things have gone through round after round of propaganda in the empire, and they have been embedded with propaganda again. Those comments, those guidelines, and those interpretations of the literature have formed an unprecedented wave of propaganda. I can't see other words, I can't see other words, as if whoever wants to say "no" is a heinous villain.

It's just that there are some things that can be discussed, because the publicity period is relatively short. For example, environmental protection and economic development and contradictions. And there are some things that are not allowed to be discussed at all because they have been promoted for a long time. For example, honoring parents, such as so-called life events, such as thousand-year-old moral traditions.

Funnily enough, the days of the overthrow of moral traditions are not unfounded, and even Confucius is only one of many criticisms. If that period continues, then the so-called millennial moral culture will disappear into the long river of history. Just as the disappearance of those ancient brilliant civilizations naturally leads to the formation of new gadgets.

So, what is sacred? It's just imperial propaganda, it's nothing more than one's own observance and the fear that others can not obey it, but one's own non-observance for fear of the whole society's abandonment of oneself.

It seems that scientific theories cannot be challenged, but the whole of science is based on assumptions, and mere explanations of phenomena are mere speculations. In fact, it is the encouragement of this kind of speculation, and it is the speculation of generations of scientists that has allowed science to develop into what it is today.

It's just that when science is integrated into society, when scientific research becomes a kind of work, the seniority seems to be very important. Why speculate on the painstaking efforts of our predecessors for no reason? It seems that the development of science over the past several hundred years has perfected basic science, and there is no need to guess and deny it at all.

If a scientific researcher always wants to prove the truth of objective things, who will fund this kind of scientific research? Or even, which scientific research institute or unit will like this kind of scientific researcher? It is better to find a clerk to sort out the information.

A theory can be proved to be true after repeated experiments, and experiments in different areas. It's a hilarious idea, and characters who shout "yes, scientists have proven it" don't really understand the theory at all.

Any theory is speculation, and the clamoring person is just trying to prove that he is right, just to cover up that he does not understand at all, and only to show that he is right through emotions and the assumption that he has been "proven".

Every time I lock the door, the house is not stolen every time, so I can claim that "locking the door" leads to "the house will not be stolen"? Anyone knows the absurdity of this idea, and the same is true of those theories.

If there has never been a case in the world where the door has been locked and the home has been burglarized, is it really possible to claim the relationship between "locking the door" and "not being burglarized"?

If there are no counterexamples, can the truth of the theory be proved?

Did the so-called verification really happen? How do I know that what was past is true? What is there to believe in the so-called verification is nothing more than the memory of the present moment?

Am I mentally retarded? I can't see these simple things?

Time is the most powerful weapon, whether it is to destroy the world or to forge it. Because all my thinking and analysis are based on memory, and without time, what is left? If I doubt all the memory, then how can I live?

Friends chat, "I'm sorry, I don't know if those childhoods really happened." Why don't we talk about the authenticity of memories?"

Will it be killed?

Yuan Changwen smiled, when he no longer believed in the memories in his head, it seemed that he had nothing to believe in. I remember there were validation trials, I remember that apples grow on trees, I remember that apples fall to the ground, but are these memories true? How do I know that the next moment will happen according to the memory in my head?

Even if it happens, it only happens in the past, is my thinking last moment true?

Is this extreme? I don't think it's extreme at all, that's it, is it real? Right, truth is truth, is there anything to compromise? The point is, why compromise?

Of course, this doesn't make you more handsome, and it doesn't make you the top in a certain industry, because there is no industry at all. Those societies, those others, are just pictorial elements that we perceive at the moment.

Including oneself, this body, this mind, although it is too real to be true, but unreal is unreal.

Yuan Changwen felt uncomfortable for a while, because he was not the role of Yuan Changwen, and all of them were just aware of this role. Just like a theatergoer, the words and deeds of Yuan Changwen's character are not controlled at all.

No matter what you're thinking, it's always an element of the picture.

Those moral ideas, those gratitude, those so-called good people are still controlling me. How can others be like this, how can this thing be like this, this is not good and that is not right, I am still thinking like this. And then there's fear, and I've always subconsciously thought that fear is a bad thing.

I should have been afraid, I had always been in a state of control, and now that everything has become uncertain, how can I not be afraid? I will still have what I want, and I think that it would be a sin not to have these things, and I will naturally be afraid.

Fear is not a bad person, even on the road of killing, fear is also kind to accompany me. Unlike the Grim Reaper, it is an existence that can only be imagined, after all, I have not returned to the arms of the little cutie. But I am afraid that the enchanting woman will appear next to me from time to time.

My opponents only have falsehood, not content that falls into fear. No matter how much you justify the content of fear, you can't win, because the act itself is driven by fear.

There is an assumption on the question that "since I know the truth, I should not be afraid," but this connection is just speculation. Because everything about the character is just a picture element, who knows what the picture element will present?

The idea that "since I don't think the world is real, I shouldn't be afraid" is based on some kind of causality, but that causality itself cannot be proven.

Perhaps, to kill is to break the self-righteous cause and effect relationship.