Translator:

original article:

我的“迷茫”:科学为何在中国没有市场

- Is there no place for science in modern China?

This Week

Other bookmark service

Gold Is there no place for science in modern China?

1695readers Translator: tzigane  09/02/2007 original article Referral Comparison reading

I recently participated in a televised discussion with an "alternative nutrition expert" from Taiwan who received his "doctorate" from a well know "diploma factory". As "the doctor" was the star of the show, I spent most of my time there admiring his performance from the stands and only got the opportunity to spar with him towards the end of the show.

Apart from being an accomplished performer, this guy is also well versed in the art of scaremongering. With a perfectly straight face, he would make statements along these lines:

"Milk is for cows, not people, therefore drinking milk is bad for your health......a sweet potato a day keeps cancer away.......the banana skin is where all its nutrition is, so if you are going to eat banana, you may as well eat rotten banana skins......heating food with a microwave oven will reduce its nutritional content by 97%, so don't do it.......I've read 700 thesis proving that eating animal protein will cause cancer......"

It takes only one sentence to promote a fallacy, but to refute one requires much more than that. In any case, the time allocated to me was barely enough to refute one, maybe two, of the fallacies he promoted, so I could only hope that the audience were able to see through all the fallacies. Although it takes specialist knowledge in biological science and medicine to specifically refute his fallacies, the ridiculousness of these statements should not escape anyone with some common sense.

However, these fallacies have managed to capture the imagination of people on both sides of the strait. A guide to healthy living written by "the doctor" has been topping the sales charts for months, and as a result many have switched from a diet of milk and meat to some sort of "detox diet" that could well cause malnutrition. A presentation by "the doctor" would drive local sales of sweet potato and "anti-cancer" vegetables up a few notches. Is this because of his impressive title or accomplished performance skills? Did he somehow connect with the collective psyche of the masses? Or is this about something else altogether?

An emphasis on the maintenance of health and wellbeing and the sheep syndrome are both enduring characteristics of the Chinese people. Once in a while, a magic portion that promises to cure all diseases will whip the country into a frenzy. We've already seen crazes such as injection of chicken blood, cultivation of black tea fungus, practice of qigong and the consumption of various so-called health products. But then, crazes in the past were grassroots efforts with no originator as such, and followers of the craze often had to expand significant effort to seek credibility from the scientific establishment and government agencies. What we are seeing now are crazes driven by brands build around personalities and "alternativeness". Instead of building credibility through scientific research, their proponents often openly discredit the scientific establishment through their "alternativeness" claim.

I suppose times have changed. In this day and age, espousing alternativeness is nothing to be ashamed of. As mainstream society evolves and authorities of the past become irrelevant, contempt for the mainstream and all that embodies authority may yet, indeed, be trendy.

Even science, once seen as the embodiment of truth as well as the most objective and reliable academic discipline, is now considered by modern China to be a laughing stock. Academics, members of the "intellectual elite" and "opinion leaders" are more than willing to label those who seek to approach questions of science with scientific reasoning and rigour as "scientific ideologues" or simply "superstitious".

Whilst science cannot provide the answer to every question, it is crucial to our understanding of it, especially when it comes to questions pertaining to health and wellbeing. A writer of some renown once asked if the masses who did not understand chemistry and the human body's response to poisoning would have difficulty grasping with the fact that arsenic is poisonous?  The fact that he used such an extreme example illustrates that perhaps he could also do with some lessons on scientific reasoning. Whilst arsenic's poisonous properties are obvious for all to see, those whose poisonous properties are not as obvious and does not manifest itself as readily as arsenic can only be identified through scientific research. For example, scientific researches have shown that many Chinese herbal medicine long thought to be non-poisonous are actually highly poisonous.

On the other hand, scientific researches have also debunked urban myths on the poisonous properties of certain things. Indeed, those with specific scientific knowledge in this field can easily explain urban myths such as “if the bugs can’t eat food genetically modified to be pest resistant, how can they possibly be edible by humans”.

The thinking of mainstream society is not necessarily founded upon logic and reason and is, by its very nature, dynamic. However, mainstream science is founded upon solid evidence and change can only occur when even stronger evidence to a different direction is presented.  In other words, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". As a result, whilst mainstream science may not be correct all the time, it is more likely than not to be correct. Mainstream science is the consensus of outstanding analytical minds based on the comparison of a wide range of evidence, not the unsubstantiated postulation of some persuasive individual.

Therefore, until mainstream science is proven incorrect, it's best to accept it as the truth. It would be unwise to believe an alternative view simply because mainstream science may have gotten it wrong. Entrusting one's body to experiment with "alternative medicine" and "alternative nutrition" may well hurt one's health as well as the hip pocket. If science can't be relied upon, then what can?

But then, this is the age of fakes. In a country where those with an appreciation for science makes up only a few percent of the population and sensationalism reigns over logic and reason, even the worst fake products and most ridiculous theories will not have difficulty finding a large, receptive audience. Moreover, the eyeball driven media and judiciary are more than happy to offer a helping hand. Those who expose the fallacies and frauds committed in the name of science can expect to be convicted of defamation by a judge stating that "Science is developmental, truth is relative. Therefore, no one has the right to accuse anyone else of scientific fraud. In fact, even the word 'fraud' is fraudulent". While the truth is still trying to put on its shoes, the fallacy juggernaut has already traveled the world. As psuedoscience and anti-science bask in its glory, science can be found in a dark corner, quietly licking its wounds.
Continue reading

Tag:

Inappropriate content?

Average Rating

  • Currently 3.00/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 3.0  |  1 ratings

7 comments    0Postit

  • 1.

    IT.soldier Level 4

    原来汉译英也可以。

    09/03/2007

  • 2.

    Thunder Level 10 | Blog

    To  tzigane:  好文。不过本文应该发表到  en.yeeyan.com。。。

    09/03/2007

  • 3.

    tzigane Level 8 | Blog

    雷大,之前就此留了个短讯给你。可以替我转过去英文版吗?

    09/03/2007

  • 4.

    Thunder Level 10 | Blog

    Yep,  now  it  is  published  on  Yeeyan  English.

    09/04/2007

  • 5.

    neuron Level 6

    @Tzigane
    Great  piece,  I  just  read  through  the  story  and  found  it's  almost  excellent  and  reads  smoothly.  You  have  some  perfect  knacks  for  doing  the  translations.  But,  I  found  a  couple  of  small  bugs  out  of  the  story  and  want  to  talk  with  you  here.  They're  ONLY  my  opinion.  Here's  what  I  want  to  make  perfect  and  English-friendly:  
    1.  On  10th  paragraph:  I  think  you  throw  away  some  words  in  the  original  paragraph.  Translated:  On  the  other  hand,  some  stuff,  once  thought  to  be  non-toxic,  can  hardly  withstand  the  test  of  science,  say,  many  people  cast  the  doubt  on  genetically  modified  insect  resistant  foods  that  “how  can  human  eat  what  even  bugs  can  not  eat”.  But  it’s  totally  unnecessary  worry  for  people  with  professional  science  background.  
    2.  I'm  sort  of  unclear  why  you  use  urban  myth  in  ..."debunked  urban  myths  on  the  poisonous  properties  of  certain  things."  Here's  urban  legend  at  Wikipedia:  “An  urban  legend  or  urban  myth  is  similar  to  a  modern  folklore  consisting  of  stories  often  thought  to  be  factual  by  those  circulating  them.”  What  I  perceive  is  there  are  only  some  health  and  nutrition  questions  claims  people  doubt.  And  Fang  also  says  that.  Here's  what  I  did:  On  the  other  hand,  some  stuff,  once  thought  to  be  non-toxic,  can  not  withstand  the  test  of  science,  say,  many  people  cast  the  doubt  on  genetically  modified  insect  resistant  foods  that  “how  can  human  eat  what  even  bugs  can  not  eat”.  But  this  is  totally  an  unnecessary  worry  for  people  with  science  background.
    3.  On  7th  paragraph:  There  are  changing  times.  In  an  increasingly  growing  multi-cultural  society,  being  alternative  is  no  longer  meant  to  be  shameful.  But  during  a  crucial  period  when  the  old  arbiters  are  down,  the  mainstream  society  is  changing  and  new  authorities  are  lacking  credibility,  disregarding  all  authorities  and  mainstreams  are  in  vogue.  
    4.  On  the  12th  paragraph:  I’d  like  to  translate  the  words  into  what  else  could  we  trust  if  science  itself  is  NOT  what  we  can  trust.  
    6.  In  the  last  paragraph,  committed  in  “those  who  expose  the  fallacies  and  frauds  committed  in  the  name  of  science  can  expect  to  be  convicted…”  is  obviously  redundant.  
    Also  fraudulent  science  is  supposed  to  be  pseudo-science.  I  often  hear  about  financial  fraudulence  and  scientific  fraud,  but  I  read  quite  few  about  so-called  fraudulent  science.  So  I  think  there’s  a  nomenclature  misunderstanding  of  science  which  deceive  people  and  fool  people.  Just  google  “pseduoscience”,  you  will  find  pseudoscience  is  much  more  popular  than  fraudulent  science,  only  in  the  locution.  :-)
    7.  A  small  language  tip:  Although  I’m  NOT  a  professional  linguist  and  translator,  I  hope  you  can  use  more  active  voices  of  verbs  instead  of  passive  voices.  As  William  Safire  says,  the  passive  voice  should  never  be  used.  So  the  story’s  last  sentence  is  a  good  try  for  you.  
    I  think  Tzigane  is  a  rising  translation  star,  so  you  can  keep  doing.  And  I  would  like  to  see  more  well-written  stories  from  you.  Good  luck.

    10/18/2007

  • 6.

    tzigane Level 8 | Blog

    neuron,  thx  for  ur  very  comprehensive  feedback  :-)  my  thoughts  below:

    1.  my  general  approach  to  translation  is  to  create  a  translated  work  that  reads  just  as  well  as  the  original.  in  that  case,  i  didn't  think  a  word  for  word  translation  would  read  well.  rather  than  trying  to  ensure  that  every  word  of  the  original  is  included,  i  basically  rewrote  that  section.  did  you  think  anything  was  lost  in  translation?

    2.  i  thought  urban  myth  was  a  nice  translation  for  风传.  btw,  i  think  the  "stuff"  you  referred  to  is  中草药  -  medicinal  chinese  herbs?  again,  i  just  don't  think  a  word  for  word  translation  works  for  this  passage.  

    3.  i  just  read  mine  again  and  must  say  that  it  was  perhaps  unnecessarily  verbose.  however,  let  me  put  this  to  you:  do  you  think  an  english  reader  would  find  your  translation  as  easy  to  read  as  you  found  the  chinese  version?

    4.  i  think  yours  is  on  the  right  track,  mine  is  just  too.....ummm,  it  just  doesn't  sound  right.  how  abt  this:  if  we  can't  trust  science,  then  what  can  we  trust?

    6.  yep  pseudoscience  is  a  much  better  translation.  i  must  have  been  too  caught  up  with  "fraud"  and  forgot  about  doing  the  science  part  properly......

    7.  yeah  i  sometimes  get  a  bit  caught  up  by  that......in  fact,  that's  what  i  tend  to  do  when  i  find  a  passage  difficult  to  translate.  something  to  work  on  i  suppose......

    thx  mate  :-)  i  generally  prefer  to  translate  chinese  content  but  have  found  good  content  to  be  few  and  far  between  (compared  to  the  english  blogosphere  anyway).  if  you  find  anything  interesting  in  the  future  please  put  in  a  recommendation  here.  i  can  certainly  do  with  morre  practice  :-)

    10/18/2007

  • 7.

    Grigo Level 6 | Blog

    谢谢你的翻译。我仔细的读了一下中文,感到很遗憾,方舟子自己也没有用科学的根据来回复“博士”,而是很多叙述性的文字。

    说实在的,我不知道类似“牛奶是给牛吃的,不是给人吃的,喝牛奶有害健康……一天吃一个红薯“这些话有什么错误之处,”东方人不适应牛奶“,很多文章都这么说,但是该博士对与否,方舟子也没有给出一个证据来。

    呵呵,我对翻译没有任何意见,是对这篇原文感到奇怪,而且还用了这么一个title。。。

    11/12/2007

Add Comment

Welcome to Yeeyan.com, the social translation site by users like you.

Read
Discover
Translate