没有上好大学但找到好工作的例子

中央电视台《经济半小时》栏目日前播出了采访经济界强人茅侃侃和李想的报道。这两个人中，一个身家在1亿元人民币以上；另一个持有所在公司百分之二十五的股份，而该公司未来的年营业额预计在15亿元左右。令人吃惊的是，这两个人都没有接受过正规的高等教育。茅侃侃因为上学时地理课成绩太差连高中都没毕业，而李想则因为高中时看到做网站可以赚大钱而放弃了考大学。(2006年5月21日中新社)

　　《经济半小时》对这两位经济界强人的访谈播出后，人们议论纷纷，并且有人在媒体上发表文章，用茅侃侃和李想没上过大学而成富翁的事实说明上大学和取得成就没有关系，推论我们的大学教育是失败的教育。笔者认真研究了这些观点，感到不能苟同，起码不能完全苟同。

　　没有接受过正规高等教育而在某一领域取得卓越成就，中外皆有人在。大家都听说过美国有些富豪没有上过大学或在大学时中途退学。我国现在又出了茅侃侃和李想。那么，这能不能说明上大学和取得成就没有关系呢？不能。理由很简单，无论中外，没有接受过高等教育而取得卓越成就的，都属于特例、个别现象。有人说茅侃侃和李想没上过大学而成富翁，让现在所有的大学生汗颜。这是用个别说明一般，在推理上是错误的。不妨打个比方，一个4岁的神童能背诵300首唐诗，而绝大多数的普通孩子到了8岁还读不出100首唐诗。因此推断绝大多数的普通孩子都是智残，岂不是荒唐吗？

　　多年前，我曾在一定范围内做过一次调查：受过正规高等教育的人和没受过正规高等教育的人在同一领域取得显著成就的比例。调查结果是，受过正规高等教育而取得显著成就的在同类人中接近10%，没受过正规高等教育而取得显著成就的在同类人中不到1‰。这两个数字说明，受过高等教育的人取得显著成就是一般现象，而没受过高等教育的人取得显著成就是个别现象。笔者之所以要强调这样的观点，是因为需要以此来抵御可能产生的新的读书无用论。如果因茅侃侃和李想没上过大学而成富翁这两个特例诱发新的读书无用论，那将是国人的悲哀。

　　用茅侃侃和李想的事例推论我们的高等教育是失败的教育，不能成立。不可否认，我们的高等教育(事实上也包括基础教育)存在许多弊端。一直以来，不少大学的课程设置、教材建设脱离于或滞后于社会需求。近年来又出现了大学教授把主要精力放在科研经费和职称的投机上，大学当权者把大学生当做赢利的工具等学术腐败、教育腐败问题。但是，不能因此笼而统之地论证我们的高等教育是失败的，只能说有许多弊端需要革除。

　　我还注意到，有人用个别说明一般，不仅表现在对教育的评价上，还表现在对其它方面的评价上。这让我们看出，一些人很有必要好好学学唯物辩证法

　　CCTV's "Half Hour of Economics" program broadcast an interview before the economic circles strongman Mao Kankan and Lee would like to reports. These two individuals, a net worth in 100 million yuan more; Another holders of the 25% stake in the company, while the company's future, turnover is expected at 15 billion. Surprisingly, these two individuals have not received formal higher education. Mao Kankan because school geography lessons poor results not even graduated from high school, but he would like to see it done because when the high school site can make a lot of money and abandoned the university entrance exam. (May 21, 2006 ZXS)

　　"Economic half-hour" economic strongman these two interviews broadcast, people talking about the incident, and someone in the media published an article by Li Mao Kankan and who never went to college to the rich man from the fact that the achievements of the University and no relation to the inference our university education is a failure of education. The author seriously study these views are can not agree, at least not completely agree.

　　Not received formal higher education in a particular field and achieve excellence, in both Chinese and foreign. We should obey the Regal said that some Americans had not had any college or university drop-out. China now has Mao Kankan and Lee would like to. Well, it can not explain the achievements of the university and not related? Not. The reason is simple, both Chinese and foreign, have received higher education but did not achieve excellence, all belong to a special case, an individual phenomenon. Some people say that Li Mao Kankan and who never went to college to form rich, now all university students ashamed. This is the general use of individual, on the reasoning is wrong. May打个比方, a 4-year-old child prodigy can memorize 300 Tang poetry, and the vast majority of ordinary children to the 8-year-old also stopped reading 100 Tang poetry. Therefore infer majority of the children are mentally normal, and does it mean that absurd?

　　Many years ago, I have done in a certain range survey: with formal higher education and those with formal higher education in the same field who has scored remarkable achievements ratio. The findings, which have received formal higher education has scored remarkable achievements in the same kind of people in close to 10%, those with formal higher education and the remarkable achievements made in the same kind of people in less than 1 ‰. These two figures show that highly educated people are generally made remarkable achievements phenomenon, and those with higher education are made notable achievements is an individual phenomenon. The author is to emphasize the view, this is because of the need to resist the possible incompetence of the new study. If Mao Kankan and Li, who never went to the University from wealthy special case evoked two incompetence of the new study, it would be the sorrow of the people.

　　Li Mao Kankan and using examples of inference to higher education is a failure of our education, can not be established. It is undeniable that our higher education (in fact also include basic education) there are many drawbacks. All along, many university curricula, teaching materials from the building or lag behind the needs of the community. In recent years have appeared university professors to focus on research funding and Title speculation, the university authorities to college students as a tool for profit, such as academic corruption, education the problem of corruption. However, the Commission can not place the cage and demonstrated our higher education is a failure, and can only say that there are many drawbacks need to get rid of.

　　I also noted that the individual was in general use, not only in the evaluation of education, but also in other aspects of the evaluation. This enabled us to see that it is quite necessary to make some people learn materialist dialectics