Learning and Talent

A friend of mine—a Ph.D. from Tsinghua University—spent most of a day at our company, and I asked him quite a few questions.

I asked: “Does learning require talent? Or is talent even a significant factor?”

He replied: “Under normal circumstances, it doesn’t. In fact, most people are far from reaching the point where talent becomes decisive.”

The real differentiator lies in learning information and learning methods.

You’ll quickly notice that good learning methods and poor ones yield efficiency differences as vast as sky and earth.

So how do we acquire good learning methods?

That depends on how well we access learning information. Quality family cognition, skilled teachers, peer learning environments, and personal motivation all shape the quality of that access.

Take family cognition, for example: In some households, parents themselves keep learning—and actively upgrading their own learning strategies. Children absorb this implicitly, and their learning methods naturally improve.

Or consider learning itself: Many children go years without grasping why they’re learning—or what purpose it serves. Ask most kids why they study, and beyond “to get into a good university,” you’ll rarely hear deeper reflection or personal meaning.

That’s the root cause behind most children’s academic struggles: a lack of both learning motivation and sound learning methods. And once those two elements are in place, achieving admission to a top-tier university (e.g., a Double First-Class institution) is realistically within reach—no “talent” required.

How to Teach Children

We often hit a wall when trying to teach something to children under age seven—especially if it involves even slightly abstract rules, like chess.

This challenge persists into early elementary school, especially during homework help. You explain a math concept clearly—yet the child seems utterly unable to grasp what you’re saying.

Why? Because young children haven’t yet developed mature abstract thinking or abstract vocabulary. What feels concrete and obvious to adults is often pure abstraction—or even gibberish—to them.

It’s rarely that the child is “slow.” More often, it’s that our habitual language hasn’t been translated into terms they can see, feel, or do.

Two practical takeaways:

Building abstract thinking takes time. Start by converting familiar abstractions into concrete images or actions—e.g., show instead of tell. Demonstrate; let them watch. That works far better than explanation alone.
Strive for clarity in everyday speech—especially when teaching.

The Essence of an Industry

At an event recently, one topic stood out: the importance of reflecting deeply on the essence of an industry.

One speaker argued, for instance, that the essence of China’s food-and-beverage industry is drinking alcohol—because it’s fundamentally about social bonding and relationship-building. For manufacturing, he said, the essence is reliability, citing brands like Bull (electrical accessories) and Gree (air conditioners).

As industries further subdivide, their essence evolves too.

By “essence,” I mean the core need or defining trait customers rely on most. Nail that—and do it consistently—the brand strength and reputation follow naturally.

So the real breakthrough lies not in chasing trends, but in deeply understanding your industry’s essence—and aligning everything around it.

When I tried applying this to my own field, though, I couldn’t land on a single satisfying word. That hesitation tells me the answer isn’t obvious—and therefore, worth digging into.

Don’t Rush to Answers

Many of us stall—not because we lack effort, but because we rush to affirm an answer too soon. We declare, “This is how it is,” and stop looking.

Especially dangerous is giving a 100% confident answer based on only 1% or 10% of relevant information. That inevitably degrades decision quality.

Yet perfect information is impossible. Much of what we gather is noise: irrelevant data, misleading signals, outright falsehoods.

That places enormous weight on our information analysis skills: collecting, filtering, and judging. And those skills must be trained. Observe seasoned experts—not just what they say, but how they decide when faced with ambiguity. You’ll see stark differences.

How do we grow here?

One foundational principle: Don’t settle on definitive answers too quickly. Stay oriented toward your goal—but keep probing for new angles, testing assumptions, and adjusting course. Product managers call this iteration.

The world shifts constantly. Even your best idea or most elegant solution will eventually expire.

Don’t Rush to Negative Judgments

Today I came across a classic insight: When making a negative judgment about someone, you should back it up with ten times the evidence you’d use for a neutral or positive one. Only then is it fair.

In reality, most people do the opposite: They wield 1 unit of evidence to deliver a 10-unit condemnation. That’s irresponsible.

Hasty criticism is human nature—we tend to overestimate ourselves. To counter it, practice withholding negative evaluations unless you’ve gathered substantial, verifiable evidence.

The same applies to ideas or proposals: Jumping to “This won’t work” is often just intellectual laziness. A more rigorous stance is to assume feasibility until proven otherwise—then test, probe, and verify.

The Third-Person Perspective

Most human suffering stems from the first-person perspective:

“I want this.”
“I’m suffering.”
“I hate him.”

That mindset breeds resentment.

Switch to the third-person perspective—a kind of “god’s-eye view”—and the framing changes:

“Why does Yao Jingang want this?”
“What’s causing Yao Jingang’s suffering?”
“Why is Yao Jingang so sensitive to this situation?”

Shifting perspective doesn’t erase the problem—but it almost always adds a dimension. Often, it reveals the answer—or at least, the next question.