Does science mean something different in China?

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

It's a fad in the official media, pretty stupid though.

Maybe it has something to do with Hu Jintao's "Scientific Development" ideology.

Originally Posted by Geographer

Maybe it has something to do with Hu Jintao's "Scientific Development" ideology.

Yes indeed...

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

From the many funny Chinese restaurant English menus I've seen I strongly suspect that poor translation or poor grasp of English is at fault here. I think within the context of this article when they say 'scientific' they actually mean being analytical and adapting (splitting into two speed-based groups) rather than being formulaic (staying in one big slow group) and unthinking (think = science!).

Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China.

This is where culture differents.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!"

And this is where ideology over the WILL to understand the other side.

This use of "Scientific" wording, is at best a translation misunderstanding but with its own culture. I.E. If one never know the culture before, when he heard the term: "Rains cat and dog", he could laugh at it too. Like you pointed, discovery of new ways and new knowledge that can improve the current condition, it is SCIENCE. The different is being leading the world for the last few centuries, the west world is keen to specify the improvement quality should be like contributing to the whole mankind, but being preservative for the last few thousand years that believing "achieve your own self-perfection is your contribution to the world", the eastern mind welcomes any degree of improvements, and if that improvements is done in a systematic, ordered (in order), exploration by yourself way and achieved in a height that one field of matters can now follow that systematic way and improve, that is SCIENCE of its own right, no need of paper certificate to endorse it.

Now that would "only" be a culture difference if it ends there, but I presume while you have no bashing intention, you still "auto-switch" to ideology angle - Is the Chinese try to be funny with "great" words like "Scientific", and "Peace" and "civilian usage" alike, to hide their true devious intentions behind those great words, fool everyone and strike when they are ready???

It is the "auto-switch" part that shows the gap between the west and east, and the hardship for world peace.

Well, back to topic, it shows how important to have forums like SDF around to slowly build understanding - maybe not that easy to trust, but at least to understand is a good start.

Originally Posted by PanAsian

From the many funny Chinese restaurant English menus I've seen I strongly suspect that poor translation or poor grasp of English is at fault here. I think within the context of this article when they say 'scientific' they actually mean being analytical and adapting (splitting into two speed-based groups) rather than being formulaic (staying in one big slow group) and unthinking (think = science!).

Yep! I once saw a photo about a supermarket in China. The label for one aisle says "dried foods" in Chinese and "f..k food" in English. The Chinese word for "dry" can also be used to describe intercourse in Chinese slang. So if someone who has little grasp of English language happens to find an English slang dictionary and looks up the English word for the Chinese "doing it"/"dry", you get "f..k".

Originally Posted by Red___Sword

This is where culture differents.





And this is where ideology over the WILL to understand the other side.

This use of "Scientific" wording, is at best a translation misunderstanding but with its own culture. I.E. If one never know the culture before, when he heard the term: "Rains cat and dog", he could laugh at it too. Like you pointed, discovery of new ways and new knowledge that can improve the current condition, it is SCIENCE. The different is being leading the world for the last few centuries, the west world is keen to specify the improvement quality should be like contributing to the whole mankind, but being preservative for the last few thousand years that believing "achieve your own self-perfection is your contribution to the world", the eastern mind welcomes any degree of improvements, and if that improvements is done in a systematic, ordered (in order), exploration by yourself way and achieved in a height that one field of matters can now follow that systematic way and improve, that is SCIENCE of its own right, no need of paper certificate to endorse it.

Now that would "only" be a culture difference if it ends there, but I presume while you have no bashing intention, you still "auto-switch" to ideology angle - Is the Chinese try to be funny with "great" words like "Scientific", and "Peace" and "civilian usage" alike, to hide their true devious intentions behind those great words, fool everyone and strike when they are ready???

It is the "auto-switch" part that shows the gap between the west and east, and the hardship for world peace.

Well, back to topic, it shows how important to have forums like SDF around to slowly build understanding - maybe not that easy to trust, but at least to understand is a good start.

I have witnessed this kind of thing first hand. It goes both ways. People need to realize that despite the significant progress already made in communication and understanding across cultures and languages, the differences are still there and misunderstandings can easily happen unless we give others the benefit of the doubt and pursue clarity without judging. I definitely hope this military forum can contribute a little bit to world peace, as ironic as it may seem.

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

Science in Chinese meaning to seek truth in reality rather than seek truth in doctrines, past practices or theoretical imagination. "scientific escort" would probably mean some sort of practice was implemented in reality rather than in minds of military theorist or computer simulation (I guessing here, needs to see to the Chinese version to truly know the context.)

edit: actually I think think about it, it's the true meaning of science. Testing a hypnosis before claiming it to be true. The true spirit of the scientific method.

The entry for military science does exactly describe what the Chinese are doing in Gulf of Aden.

Military science is the process of translating national defence policy to produce military capability by employing military scientists, including theorists, researchers, experimental scientists, applied scientists, designers, engineers, test technicians, and military personnel responsible for prototyping. In so doing, military science seeks to interpret policy into what military skills are required, which, by employing military concepts and military methods, can use military technologies, military weapon systems, and other military equipment to produce required military capability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_science

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

Some time ago I read a review in my Dutch newspaper of a book that said that the excessive power of Western countries over the last two centuries led to Western terms with their own history being applied to Eastern ways of thinking. Western science is derived from Western philosophy which is derived from Western theology, i.e. mostly the Muslim ways of thinking during what we call the Middle Ages. Chinese, Japanese and Indian thoughts have a different history and a different division of areas of interest so a term like "Indian Philosophy" is an oxymoron.

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

I disagree, I feel that your interpretation of 'science' is dogmatic.

The scientific method is essentially an organized effort in trial and error. First you make an observation of a phenomenon or a problem, then you come up with a reasonable explanation for the phenomenon or solution to address the problem, and finally you perform experiments to determine if your explanation or solution is valid and if not modify your explanation or solution.

As long as one follows the scientific method, performs experiments with appropriate rigour, and use sound reasoning, studying how to prevent vegetables from rotting on long naval excursions is a perfectly valid scientific exercise.

Originally Posted by Geographer

Does science mean something different in China? Because every military news blast originating in China seems to invoke science. "Scientific escort"? What the heck is that? How many peer-reviewed articles are published based on that research? How many PhDs are on-board these ships? They are conducted training and research, not science. Science is the progress of discovering new knowledge of the natural or human world. New knowledge means new to the world, not just new to China. I'm pretty sure everything China is discovering it the anti-piracy missions about sea-keeping, maritime logistics, and so on is well known to the ancient navies of Britain, France, and the United States.

It seems to me that China is trying to cloak its military under the banner of "science." It's like saying, "This isn't a gun, it's a research tool! And I'm not going to shoot you, I'm going to conduct scientific research!" (Which is little comfort because "scientific research" was the justification for Japan's Unit 731 in China and Dr. Mengele in Germany). Call a spade a spade: it's not science, it's naval warfare. To call it science is an insult to real scientists.

Originally Posted by PikeCowboy

I disagree, I feel that your interpretation of 'science' is dogmatic.

The scientific method is essentially an organized effort in trial and error. First you make an observation of a phenomenon or a problem, then you come up with a reasonable explanation for the phenomenon or solution to address the problem, and finally you perform experiments to determine if your explanation or solution is valid and if not modify your explanation or solution.

As long as one follows the scientific method, performs experiments with appropriate rigour, and use sound reasoning, studying how to prevent vegetables from rotting on long naval excursions is a perfectly valid scientific exercise.

I agree with PikeCowboy. Science is simply a method. It does not have to be related to any specific field. It involves 5 main steps: data collection, proposing a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis with experiments, formulation of theories, attempt to interpret phenomena with the theory. As long as it is done properly, i.e. with well-thought-out controls, it is good science. And science does not have to be new discoveries. In fact, majority of what is done in science is revision and modification of old theories. For instance, Einstein studied gravity, which was studied extensive by Newton and others centuries before him. So he's not making new discoveries, but giving new interpretations to a phenomenon that has been observed long time ago.

In fact, making new discoveries is only the most primitive and initial step in science. Making new discoveries is equivalent to data acquisition. Initially, we know nothing about a certain phenomenon. So we need to "make new discoveries". Like in biology/medicine, we constantly find new proteins/enzymes. That actually means we are still at a very early stage of biology. The real attempt to actually understand biology can only begin once we gather all the parts and have information on every protein/enzyme there is to discover.

IMO, science is like solving a puzzle. You can only begin an attempt to solve the puzzle once you have ALL the pieces in front of you. "Making new discoveries" is like gathering all the puzzle pieces. As you can imagine, that's the easy part, compared to what happens next.

PikeCowboy and vesicles, you are both right in your descriptions of the scientific method, but I think you're missing the context. If learning new things through trial and error were science, then everyone everywhere would be conducting science. The word loses much of its meaning. Every navy tries new things on voyages, even the USN with centuries of experience. It's like saying the sailors were served...three meals a day! Duh! Yet only Chinese news reports constantly invoke "science".

I think there has been an explicit editorial decision to use that word as much as possible to play on the positive connotations of science. What Dr. Mengele did in the concentration camps could be considered science, but no one describes it as science because his experiments' cruelty don't deserve to be grouped with the work of good scientists. Similarly, historians describe the record of Japan's Unit 731 as war crimes, not science. Yet, according to a strict definition of scientific experimentation, what Unit 731 did probably qualifies as science.

Finally, there is a difference between science and engineering. A basic difference is that science discovers and engineering applies. Practical things like how to preserve vegetables better would fall under the heading of engineering improvements, not science.

So just because something follows a textbook definition of the scientific method doesn't mean 1) it ought to trumpeted as science, 2) it contributes anything to the world's understanding of nature.

Originally Posted by Geographer

PikeCowboy and vesicles, you are both right in your assessment of the scientific method, but I think you're missing the context. If learning new things through trial and error were science, then everyone everywhere would be conducting science. The word loses much of its meaning. Every navy tries new things on voyages, even the USN with centuries of experience. It's like saying the sailors were served...three meals a day! Duh! Yet only Chinese news reports from constantly invoke "science".

I think there has been an explicit editorial decision to use that word as much as possible to play on the positive connotations of science. What Dr. Mengele did in the concentration camps could be considered science, but no one describes it as science because his experiments' cruelty don't deserve to be grouped by the work of good scientists. Similarly, historians describe the world of Japan's Unit 731 as war crimes, not science. Yet, according to a strict definition of scientific experimentation, what Unit 731 did probably qualifies.

Finally, there is a difference between science and engineering. A basic difference is that science discovers and engineering applies. Practical things like how to preserve vegetables better would fall under the heading of engineering improvements, not science.

So just because something follows a textbook definition of the scientific method doesn't mean 1) it ought to trumpeted as science, 2) it contributes anything to the world's understanding of nature.

I see what you are saying. I agree with you that there is simply too much misuse of science in China's media. A lot of urban legends have been legitimized by labeling them "scientific". I am extremely frustrated by it. My-laws are into learning as many new things as possible. They do it by reading Chinese newspapers on-line. Many of the stuff they read fall into the category of urban legend/myth, but they believe it since it's printed and published in a newspaper. One time, my father-in-law found a piece that says lemon is a miracle drug against cancer and is 250000 times more effective. My immediately question was "against what"? it says 250000 times more effective, but what was it compared to? I went on-line and did a google-search and immediately found that this is simply a made-up information that was claimed to be published by a medical institute, which sternly denied that it ever published such information. yet, the Chinese newspaper made it sound like this is something confirmed in the international scientific community. Just last weekend, my father-in-law found another "valuable information" about cars releasing benzene while sitting in the sun. He immediately told us (my wife and I) that we should keep the window open for a while before turning on A/C. I found it weird and googled it again. It turned out to be a well-known urban legend. Many websites describe it and mention that there is no research on how much benzene would be found in a car sitting in hot sun and how it would compare to the amount of benzene found in the air or inside of a house. So there is simply no reason to worry about it. Yet, when I explained this to my father-in-law, he wouldn't listen to me. His argument was that we should believe it since it's a published piece. He then went on and "suggested" that I should be less cocky and listen to others more. My father-in law is an electrical engineer. If he believes all this crap, imagine how the general public perceives these misinformation. And Chinese news websites are filled with this kind of misinformation. And don't get me started on all the Chinese medicine crap...

Originally Posted by vesicles

I see what you are saying. I agree with you that there is simply too much misuse of science in China's media. A lot of urban legends have been legitimized by labeling them "scientific". I am extremely frustrated by it. My-laws are into learning as many new things as possible. They do it by reading Chinese newspapers on-line. Many of the stuff they read fall into the category of urban legend/myth, but they believe it since it's printed and published in a newspaper. One time, my father-in-law found a piece that says lemon is a miracle drug against cancer and is 250000 times more effective. My immediately question was "against what"? it says 250000 times more effective, but what was it compared to? I went on-line and did a google-search and immediately found that this is simply a made-up information that was claimed to be published by a medical institute, which sternly denied that it ever published such information. yet, the Chinese newspaper made it sound like this is something confirmed in the international scientific community. Just last weekend, my father-in-law found another "valuable information" about cars releasing benzene while sitting in the sun. He immediately told us (my wife and I) that we should keep the window open for a while before turning on A/C. I found it weird and googled it again. It turned out to be a well-known urban legend. Many websites describe it and mention that there is no research on how much benzene would be found in a car sitting in hot sun and how it would compare to the amount of benzene found in the air or inside of a house. So there is simply no reason to worry about it. Yet, when I explained this to my father-in-law, he wouldn't listen to me. His argument was that we should believe it since it's a published piece. He then went on and "suggested" that I should be less cocky and listen to others more. My father-in law is an electrical engineer. If he believes all this crap, imagine how the general public perceives these misinformation. And Chinese news websites are filled with this kind of misinformation. And don't get me started on all the Chinese medicine crap...

How do you deal with such "knowledge"? A wise old woman explained me, don't disagree, agree and discuss the knowledge in order to work out an application. That leads to a good feeling of the "knowledgeable" nitwit, while at the same time you can direct him to do put things into a whole system of sensible action without any word of denial.

You fully agree first (是的 ［是的］ Shìde), afterwards you exagerate the topic into absurd dimensions (加以 ［加以］ jiāyǐ) with the nitwit following you through with logic and "knowledge". It's important to be perfectly understanding and "having read somewhere about more issues concerning this topic". The conclusions about action you "both" figure out from the "analyses of the additional benefits/risks pertaining to this information" would make nice youtube videos. The goal is to cause the maximum inconvenience for the habits of the person that is to be convinced of not doing anything about it.
It's similar to the old Radio Yerevan Jokes - Armeniapedia.org.

The lemon, it helps against cancer, really. You have a body that constantly fights much more cancer than you know. Cancer cells are cells with DNA damage that leads to unstopped growth. Under such malfunction the cells within an organism are programmed to commit suicide and or show kill-me markers for the immune system and the immune system likes lemons among other things. But even these safety measures are sometimes not enough, requiring much more invasive treatment.

In the benzene case, you agree with him, say thanks a lot and start a discussion upon what else emits some quantity of benzene like shoes, mobile phones, and so on. In the end you created a complicated world full of benzene that still makes perfect sense (because the nitwit has no idea about quantity and concentration and you can always claim to have read it somewhere), but who will forever go without shoes and mobile phone?

I hope you'll very much enjoy yourself next time your father in law made a "discovery". If you follow the above advice he'll from now on hold you in high esteem because you are such an understanding and knowledgeable man who even politely listens to the wisdom of the elder. And please, take some photos or a video for future generations.