origin. Although the matte is also origin and the matter is outside of consciousness, but the matter that we think and say is consciousness. In this way, we can say that the material and course are all in our heart. Berkeley said, the world is my image. This sentence is wrong. It should be changed to: the world we think and say is my image. The changing of matter and the effect of matter on us are out of consciousness. It will work no matter whether we think of it or not. But objective things will not influence my decision until they become my consciousness. Only what we think and say will affect our decision-making. People's decision determine human practice. People's practice determine the change in the physical world. I call this as “I think, so I do”. This sentence is more important than the famous saying of Descartes,“I think, so I am.”

For example, there was a stone in front of me. I didn't see it and I walked forward. The result was I fell down. The second time I came here, I would bypass it. This stone is outside my consciousness. No matter whether I see it or not, it is an objective reality, it will affect my practice, but only when I see it, can it affect my decision-making, I bypassed it. When I didn't see it, it will not affect my decision. I will keep walking. In the sense of decision- making, consciousness is the origin, and material is not the origin. The matter only affects the result of practice, but it does not affect decision-making. What is the purpose of understanding? To serve decision-making. All theories are for decision-making. When we say knowledge guidance practice we mean to guide decision-making rather than directly guide the result of practice. The result of practice is influenced by the material, but the practical decisions are not directly affected by the material.

Therefore, only idealism can develop the dynamic aspect of philosophy. Once the result of practice is formed, it cannot be changed. Decision-making can be changed, it is positive and dynamic. This is the first value of subjective idealism.

The second value of subjective idealism is that the criterion of truth is a subjective standard. I firmly oppose the principle of seeking truth from facts. It is right to test the truth in practice. But how does practice test the truth? When we create a hypothesis, for example, a new medical theory, then we make a new drug, and predict based on this hypothesis. For example, we predict that this new drug can cure heart disease. Then we go to practice, let the patient take medicine, and then see if the result of practice is consistent with the prediction. If it is consistent, it proves that the hypothesis is truth, that is to test the truth with prediction.

But what is the result? Is it a fact? No, it is a new experience. It may be true and may not be true. The feeling may be inaccurate, the results of the examination may be inaccurate, the relief of illness may be a temporary phenomenon, and may have a hidden danger, even the experimental data published in the paper may be forged. Therefore, we cannot confirm what is the fact and cannot seek truth from facts. We can only use experience to test the truth.