People's science reflects doubts about academia

• Source: Global Times
• [23:14 January 07 2010]
• Comments

The community of professional scientific researchers often sees internal disputes. It is not a monolithic bloc or a group that parrots o¡ cial lines. How can it be seen as an official representative? Moreover, most professional researchers are just ordinary people who have been trained and educated, not a privileged group.

The fundamental difference between the two communities lies in their different research methods.

Professionals have long used mature theories and precise methods to acquire reliable knowledge, whereas amateurs often apply random and unfocused arguments.

Whenever an unsurpassable gap emerged between the proof and their conclusion, amateurs invariably use the word "obviously." Some of them even ignore or made up basic facts.

Process is more important than results in academic research. China's "people's scientists" also have nothing to do with private scientists like Edison. These scientists still used rigorous methods to acquire knowledge through precise experiments.

But, as we saw after the unearthing of Cao Cao's tomb, "people's scientists" are often warmly welcomed by the public. This is, in part, the fault of academic scholars, many of whom merely focus on research and neglect the popularization of knowledge.

Facing groundless criticism from amateurs, they often disdain dialogue with them and arrogantly keep silence, meaning they lose their public voice. Cases of researchers violating academic norms also hurt their credibility.

Only by addressing cases of academic fraud, and engaging with the public on a regular basis, can the academic establishment regain the trust of ordinary people.

The author is a PhD candidate at the Department of History, Nanjing University. globaltimesopinion@yahoo.com