The process of the presentation of an idea involves presenter and listeners.
Meanwhile, the listeners have to express their feedback upon the end of the presentation, it is called criticization.

What’s the reference line of the critic’s opinions?
Do they truly understand the content of the presentation?
Do they pay full attention to it?
Do the background of the critics legit to make relevant critics?

Perhaps they selectively categorize the contents into the comprehensible and the incomprehensible.
The comprehensible normally within their field of interest.
Whereas, the incomprehensible is beyond their interest.
Facing the comprehensible content, they would pay full attention, even ardently add up certain points showing that they are good in that.
For the incomprehensible content, they will smartly cover up their ignorance by disregarding it.

To be a critic, it is ultimately crucial to carry an objective view.
Their view has to include multiple facets of knowledge, they cannot just indulge in their familiar field of knowledge only.

Hence it is important for a critic to engage in continuous self-improvement in multi aspects.

/

在想法點子的呈現裡, 這過程涉及了呈現者和聆聽者.
呈現完畢以後, 聆聽著須將就剛才的呈現發表看法, 也即是評論.

評論家的看法, 是基於什麼呢?
他們是否明白呈現者的內容?
他們是否專心聆聽呢?
評論家的背景到底適合做相關評論嗎?

還是他們只是針對性的, 選擇性的
將內容解析成兩類: 可明的及不可明的
可明的往往就是在他們的興趣範圍
相反,不可明的就在他們的興趣範圍以外
面對可明的內容, 他們會給予萬分精神, 甚至熱情的加以補充來顯現自己的知識
然而不可明的內容, 他們便會忽視, 以便精明地掩飾自己的淺解.

身為一位評論家, 客觀性的看法是相當重要的
評論家的見解需要顧及多方面的知識, 不能只是一味地站在自己熟悉的知識圈兜轉.
因此身為一位評論家, 持續性的多元自我增值是非常重要的.