Core Viewpoint - The resurgence of interest in electronic almanacs reflects a modern adaptation of traditional practices, providing individuals with a sense of control and community amidst stress and uncertainty [1][2][4]. Group 1: Modern Appeal of Electronic Almanacs - Electronic almanacs offer clear directives that help individuals manage anxiety and provide a sense of control over their daily activities [2][4]. - The format of electronic almanacs is tailored to modern reading habits, making them visually appealing and easy to consume on digital platforms [3][4]. - The content of electronic almanacs has evolved to include contemporary lifestyle advice, making them more relatable and engaging for users [3][4]. Group 2: Social and Psychological Aspects - Many users engage with electronic almanacs as a social topic, using them to connect with others rather than strictly adhering to their guidance [2][4]. - The use of electronic almanacs can serve as a psychological buffer, allowing individuals to attribute setbacks to external factors rather than personal shortcomings [2][4]. - The community aspect of discussing electronic almanacs fosters a sense of belonging and connection among users [2][4]. Group 3: Caution Against Exploitation - Some electronic almanac creators may exploit users by promoting products under the guise of providing guidance, which raises concerns about potential scams [4]. - Over-reliance on electronic almanacs can lead to negative consequences, as they do not provide comprehensive personal guidance and may result in poor decision-making [4]. - Ultimately, the responsibility for creating one's own "auspicious days" lies in personal actions and clear thinking, rather than solely relying on electronic almanacs [4].

Group 1 - The article discusses the concept of "superstition" and its multifaceted nature, highlighting that it is not merely a subject waiting to be conquered by science but is intertwined with various aspects of life [1] - It references Jiang Shaoyuan's work "Folklore and Superstition," which defines superstition as beliefs and practices that conflict with modern science, reflecting a historical perspective on the topic [2][5] - The article explores the public's reaction to the construction of Sun Yat-sen's mausoleum, where rumors about the need to capture souls of children led to widespread panic and the creation of protective charms [6][7] Group 2 - Jiang Shaoyuan's analysis includes the official responses to the rumors, indicating that the authorities' actions may have inadvertently fueled public fear rather than alleviating it [7][8] - The article contrasts the public perception of Sun Yat-sen with that of Lenin, suggesting that the lack of a "savior" figure in Chinese culture contributed to a different public response to revolutionary figures [16][20] - It emphasizes the cultural differences between Russian and Chinese traditions regarding the concept of a "savior," noting that Chinese culture tends to focus on self-reliance rather than reliance on a singular heroic figure [21][24]