The high dependence on and valuation of direct experience is the most fundamental marker that distinguishes empirical research from all “esoteric discourse” (玄谈). For the researchers themselves, however, it seems equally necessary to remain vigilant that the importance of experience does not mean it can automatically present the answers to theoretical propositions. “Bare” experience without theoretical processing, while not necessarily meaningless, is difficult to classify as academic research. In the study of rural society, for example, anthropology is adept at deriving inspiration for theoretical dialogue from local experiences in small communities such as villages, but if those experiences alone were sufficient, what is to distinguish anthropologists from local elites (such as former village heads) with far richer knowledge of those experiences?