As Mencius said: “Fish is what I want, so is bear paw. But if I cannot get both, then I would take bear paw instead of fish.” The well-known saying runs from mouth to mouth through handing down from generation to generation.
　　Recently I read a new book, Chinese inspiring brother: the Way to NBA for Jeremy Shu-How Lin (written by Qin Lin and Yu Jia), in which it describes Jeremy Shu-How Lin like this, “he proves by high credit in economics of Harvard University and honors obtained in basket field that both fish and bear paw can get together and bring out the best in each other if knowledge is regarded as fish and skill is as bear paw.” I feel this passage seems to the overturn of “I cannot get both” said above by Mencius. However, why not does it be overturned? It is a fact that Jeremy Shu-How Lin obtained “fish” from Harvard and “bear paw” in NBA. Can we make Mencius eat his words?
　　This is a joke, of course. Actually, the original meaning of words said by Mencius is not conflict with the inspiring tracks of Jeremy Shu-How Lin. “I cannot get both” is the premise but not conclusion of “choose between the two”. The meaning of it is: it has to choose bear paw while give up fish if they cannot get both. Another extended meaning of it is: why we give up one of two if we have ability and conditions to obtain fish and bear paw together?
　　So with that said, what Mencius said and what Qin Lin and Yu Jia appraised for Jeremy Shu-How Lin are right. The problem lies in some people who make deliberate misinterpretation out of context for traditional classics, or we are misled by some people mentioned above.
　　My interest in reading this book is “stimulating” from comments on “both fish and bear paw can be obtained together” in the end of it. This passage is put in the last essay “Revelation on reproductive ‘Jeremy Shu-How Lin’ ”, with its implied meaning to challenge idea-oriented visible.
　　I appreciate this topic, which shall be the core of this book in my opinion. The author of this book offers ten mirrors of “success may be copied” for modern young readers through the example of Jeremy Shu-How Lin, namely, profound accumulation, modesty and comity, never giving up, resisting frustration and crisis, keeping in mind gratitude, honoring our parents, diligence and hardworking. Facing the ten mirrors, you will find that it is not too high to reach the height of Jeremy Shu-How Lin, whose inspiring experiences are so close to everyone in actual life. If you look up at him and be ashamed of his inferiority, it means that your idea is occupied firstly by “success cannot be copied”-oriented, so you are kidnapped by inertia relentlessly in enterprise. 　　The author points out in the head of book: “please do not challenge the spiritual idea of successor with “not be copied” if it is hard to copy the success of Jeremy Shu-How Lin. There are various things about from ordinary to great, or from ugly to white swan, but it is similar in the spirit of leading people to success. So in that sense, success may be copied. In other words, thousands of young people with enterprise make effort to walk the way that Buffett walked though there is only one Buffett in the world. Why not we copy the road of Jeremy Shu-How Lin? With respect to “ten mirrors”, the author tries to provide striking key points with few words, for example, profound accumulation means a person of talent and virtue not being made use of –it is not time for action, modesty and comity means keeping a low profile and being restrained, never giving up means one can take temporary setbacks, keeping in mind gratitude means thanks for our parents and teammates. In doing so, the argument of “success may be copied” is strengthened.
　　Jeremy Shu-How Lin is a common person, whose success results from his self-motivation from childhood. His idea of self-motivation may be shared and copied by us. Since Jeremy Shu-How Lin as an ordinary person can obtain success in his field, why can’t you create a new world in your field with your courage?