Why do some people always use the word "civil science" to ridicule

If pseudoscience is equated with a certain identity such as a citizen scientist, it is a means for people with ulterior motives to engage in improper competition for academic discourse power; while attacking pseudoscience as pseudoscience, A green light for true pseudoscience. Anti-civilian science in the name of anti-pseudoscience should clearly explain the inherent and inevitable connection between "civilian science" and pseudoscience on the basis of revealing the concepts of "civilian science" and pseudoscience. Unfortunately, no one who is anti-pseudoscience and anti-civilian science in the name of anti-pseudoscience can do this. What is people's science? People's science is pseudoscience; what is pseudoscience? Pseudoscience is people's science - this is the basic logic of those who oppose "people's science".

However, according to my observations and generalizations, "civilian scientists" initially referred to non-official civilian scientists outside our country's system, but later gradually extended to research topics that were not within their own professional fields, or in There are no scientists with PhD degrees in the field of research. The essence of the concept of "people's science" is not a classification of groups of scientists, but an academic evaluation that equates "people's science" and "pseudoscience". Therefore, "people's science" is a derogatory term.

Because a large number of first-class scientific achievements in human history have been achieved by citizen scientists. Equating "civilian science" and "pseudoscience" is neither historical nor logical, and has no scientific basis. The reason why a certain internal relationship can be established between "civil science" and pseudoscience is that people with ulterior motives have extended the connotation and denotation of the concept of "civil science".

Currently, the person who has made the most comprehensive argument that “civil science” is pseudoscience is the historian of science Tian Song. Tian Song: "Civil science" refers to a special group of people who conduct so-called scientific research outside the scientific community. They either hope to solve a major scientific problem in one fell swoop, or try to overturn a famous scientific theory, or They are committed to establishing some kind of huge theoretical system, but they do not accept or understand the basic paradigm of the scientific community, and cannot achieve basic communication with the scientific community. In general, their work is not scientific. value in the sense.” Among them, “people who do not accept or understand the basic paradigm of the scientific community and cannot achieve basic communication with the scientific community” are the problems between “civilians” and another group of “amateur science enthusiasts” "The fundamental difference between.

However, according to formal logic, it is necessary to make a judgment on the full name of "civilian science", which is "a special group of people who conduct so-called scientific research outside the scientific community", as having certain attributes or characteristics. One of two conditions must be met: complete induction or causal analysis. Obviously, when Tian Song made judgments about the universal attributes of "civilian science", "a special group of people outside the scientific community who conduct so-called scientific research," he neither made complete induction nor conducted necessary relationship analysis, but purely It is a list of phenomena that are the essential characteristics of "civil science".

Therefore, such a list is arbitrary and has no scientific basis. It is on the basis of this incomplete induction, or even no induction at all, that the full name judgment of “Minke is pseudoscience” becomes “Minke is pseudoscience—someone is Minke—someone’s original theory” It is the major premise of syllogism reasoning such as "pseudoscience". However, because the major premise "civilian science is pseudoscience" is neither based on complete induction nor on the basis of causal analysis, the major premise of this syllogistic reasoning does not hold.

In our country, the so-called citizen scientists refer to scientists outside the system; and the distinction between within the system and outside the system is only available in China. In non-socialist countries, including Western countries, there is no distinction between within the system and outside the system. External distinction.

If only scientists within the system belong to the "scientific community" and civilian scientists outside the system belong to the "scientific community", then doesn't it mean that scientists from other non-socialist countries all belong to the "scientific community"? "Outside of the same body of science and technology"?

If Tian Song defends that the internal and external standards of the community of science and technology he refers to are not the inside and outside of the system, but other standards, then how can he put "civil science and technology into the same body"? "Refers to a special group of people who conduct so-called scientific research outside the scientific community"? Isn't "civilian science" the abbreviation of "civilian scientists"? In China, doesn't "civilian scientist" refer to scientists outside the system? If Tian Song's scientific theory refers to a special group of people who conduct so-called scientific research outside the system, and does not refer to "civilian" scientists outside the system, so his definition of "civilian science" is incorrect. Defining a concept in an incorrect way, with form divorced from content, is sheer nonsense of substituting concepts.

In addition, Tian Song’s above-mentioned definition of “civil science” shows that he has not really understood the concept of “scientific unity”. The scientific community is a group of scientists or scholars established on the basis of the same science or disciplinary paradigm. The link that organizes scientists or scholars into a group is the "disciplinary paradigm", which is Tian Song's "basic paradigm of the scientific community" , so the so-called "scientific unity" is actually "paradigm unity". The difference between different "paradigm homologs" is not the difference between "scientific homologs" and "non-scientific homologs", but the difference between different "scientific homologs".

The development process of human science is the process of paradigm shift; corresponding to the process of paradigm shift, it is generally the process of the disintegration of the old "scientific unity" and the establishment of a new "scientific unity" . Although the process of the disintegration of the old "scientific community" and the establishment of a new "scientific community" corresponds to the paradigm shift process, it is not synchronized - the paradigm shift means that the old "scientific community" "Disintegration and the establishment of a new "scientific community" do not mean that at the same time as the old paradigm is transformed and the new paradigm is formed, a new "scientific community" can be formed immediately on the basis of the new paradigm.

Between the emergence of a new paradigm and the establishment of a new "scientific community", a special group of people who conduct so-called scientific research outside the old "scientific community" will inevitably appear. These "special groups" form the prototype of a new scientific community. Tian Song defines these "special groups" as "people's science" and "pseudo-science" that are outside the "scientific community". In fact, he denies that the development process of human science is a process of paradigm shift, indicating that Tian Song lacks Basic knowledge of the history of science and common sense of science.

Whether it is the development of knowledge, philosophy, science, or economics, it is essentially the development of theory. The development of any science is achieved through the generation of original theories. Without original theories, there would be no development of science. The history of human science is the history of the emergence and development of original theories. Therefore, strictly speaking, the only criterion for academic evaluation is the originality of the theory. Generally speaking, the degree of originality of a theory is directly proportional to the academic level, practical value, and academic status of the scholar. This should be the "basic paradigm of scientific unity" in academic evaluation.

Therefore, the logic that people's science is pseudoscience and someone is a people's science, so someone's original theory is pseudoscience does not hold water. The concept of "civilian science" is purely about incompetent people who have complete academic qualifications but no decent academic record, high scores and low skills, who use their poor self-esteem to cover up their low self-esteem, and use their glory in the examination room to cover up the embarrassment and actual achievements of others. Self-incompetence is a way to achieve psychological balance and a tool to engage in vicious competition for the right to speak academically.

Therefore, folk science is not pseudoscience, but the concept of "civil science" is pseudoscience. None of those who are hysterically criticizing "civilian science" at the top of their lungs has an original theory. They have no idea how original theories are generated.

Since ancient times, our country has said that "the real masters are among the people". The real source of the development of science and art is social practice.

There is no insurmountable gap between universities and society. The innovation power and inspiration of universities cannot be separated from the innovation atmosphere and innovation needs of society. Without the vigorous development of civil sciences, innovative universities will become water without a source and a tree without roots. The current situation and future of "civilian science" and "official science" in our country:

Integrity of academic qualifications, formality of positions, prominent titles, prominent status, superior treatment, impetuous academic style, "official science" Better than "civilian science"; theoretical originality, knowledge systematization, logical rigor, rigorous academic style, academic standardization, and practical effectiveness, "civilian science" is better than "official science".

The "publication level" of published papers, the citation rate of papers, having a university podium, mastering the academic voice, occupying the commanding heights of media publicity, conquering cities and conquering territory, winning awards and small prizes, all kinds of honorary status, "official science" Better than "civilian science"; what can truly create original basic theories, change human history, leave traces in the history of human science, leave a name in history, establish the academic status of the Chinese nation, and bring glory to the country and the nation is not the current "official science" with unlimited glory But it is the "people's science" that is temporarily unknown.

The anti-"civilian science" in the name of anti-"pseudoscience" in our country has deep social roots. Folk science is pseudoscience—someone is a folk science—and someone’s original theory is pseudoscience. It’s hard to say that such logic is so popular in society that it’s really just out of opposition to “pseudoscience.” If it is really just about opposing "pseudoscience", there is no need to bundle "pseudoscience" and "civilian science" - specific identities, and there is no need to equate the two concepts of "pseudoscience" and "civilian science". In the name of anti-pseudoscience, the harm of anti-civilian science is that instead of using original theories to test whether a doctorate is qualified, doctorate titles are used to measure the validity of original theories, and academic evaluation standards are reversed to elevate academic qualifications and devalue academic ability. In the name of anti-"pseudoscience", anti-"civilian science" is to cover up illegal purposes in the name of legality, and to replace academic evaluation with identity evaluation. It is a challenge to real academic ability by fake "Ph.D.s" with high scores and low abilities.

Those who jump high in the anti-"civilian science" wave are actually people without originality. But the green mountains cannot cover it, and it flows eastward after all. The cries of the apes on both sides of the bank cannot be held back. The light boat has passed the ten thousand mountains, thousands of sails have passed by the side of the sunken boat, and thousands of trees have sprung in front of the diseased trees. The wheel of history is unstoppable and the laws of history are irresistible. Anyone who tries to cover up the sky with one hand, goes against the grain, deliberately distorts and inverts the value system of human civilization, and solidifies the alienation phenomenon in socialist society by distinguishing between "official subjects and civilian subjects" is not just alienation and a joke, but anti-humanity. "Knowledge is valuable, and credits are more expensive. As long as you get a diploma, you can throw away both." "Long live 60 points, suffer for 70 points." It is difficult to imagine that in such a passive learning environment, we can cultivate world-class students. Innovative talents with the ability to produce original results. It is hard to imagine that "academic qualifications" and "academic ability", "major courses" and "science" formed through such passive learning can be equated. Indulging in the illusion that "technical science" is equated with "science", "civilian science" and "pseudoscience" has seriously stifled people's creativity, causing all the people not to read except reading textbooks, and all the people to play games in their spare time. machine phenomenon. As a result, my country has the largest number of university students, including doctoral students, in the world, and the least reading per capita in the world. Internet cafes are full and libraries are deserted, which runs counter to the goal of establishing a national innovation system.

It is undeniable that in the current education policy and value-oriented environment, it is possible to "read and read, and there will be a snail girl in the book", and "read and read, and there will be thousands of gold in the book." It is also realistic, but "read, read, read, there are original theories in the book" is just wishful thinking.

In the face of the objective fact that the ability of "civilian science" to produce original results is better than that of professional science, a group of fake doctors who are obsessed with it, insist on their own way, and do not know the heights of the world, stand up with one hand all day long A golden cudgel, one hand pointing the middle finger at the "civilian science", pointing at the nose and jumping into rage, shouting curses, can only be an ant's love for the locust tree, or a worm's fly shaking the tree, deceiving oneself and others, and bringing humiliation to oneself.

People who hold the title of doctorate from top Western universities and have no idea how original theories are generated also have no idea how the education system and the scientific research system, teaching results and scientific research results are connected.

Instead of examining whether a new theory is true based on the theory itself, one should judge whether a new theory is true based on a person's identity and academic background, which makes the teaching goals and scientific research goals of universities completely disconnected and even fundamentally opposed.

One soldier is raging, and a general is raging in a nest. A weak general has no strong soldiers. People who do not have original theories and do not understand how original theories are generated do not have the right to speak in academic evaluation. The so-called doctors from the world's top elite universities, who are obsessed with the concept of "disciplinary classes", "international practices" and "double top" standards, control the leadership and academic evaluation power of our country's universities, and can only cultivate a large number of high-scoring, low-functioning, doctoral-level graduates. A mediocre doctorate.

The academic standards of "civilian science" and "official science" are unified. The binary distinction between "civilian science" and "official science" has no scientific basis. "official science" is true science and "civilian science" "It is a pseudo-scientific academic evaluation standard that has no scientific basis. Our country wants to establish a national innovation system, not to oppose "civil science", but to fundamentally change the administrative education system that stifles people's innovative spirit and suppresses people's innovative ability, and uses public funds to purchase book numbers and page academic qualifications. Administrative academic system for evaluating professional titles.

Under China's current "official-based" and dual-administrative system of academia and education, there is no need to come up with any major breakthroughs within the system. If there are any, the results will be achieved by people within the system. outside. The concept of "pseudoscience" itself can be established, but the vast majority of pseudoscience is not a civilian science but an official science, and is not outside the system but within it.