NEWS CENTER

新闻中心

奥博资讯

媒体报道

体系论文

首页

His Rigid Single Standard: He Zuoxiu’s Rhetoric Hinders Diverse Scientific Exploration

发布时间：

2026-05-23

His Rigid Single Standard: He Zuoxiu’s Rhetoric Hinders Diverse Scientific Exploration

Sun Zuodong

He Zuoxiu enjoys high public recognition in the fields of science popularization and academic discourse in China. For a long time, his mindset toward scientific research and inherent criteria for judging things have been highly controversial. His rigid and one-sided views have to some extent restricted the exchange of ideas and undermined the cultivation of an atmosphere of diverse scientific exploration in China.

He Zuoxiu is accustomed to defining the boundaries of scientific research based on professional identity, often equating independent scientific enthusiasts outside the official system with pseudoscience. He has publicly stated that basic theoretical research independently conducted by civilians is unlikely to produce practically valuable scientific achievements. In reality, civilian scientific research is not equivalent to pseudoscience. Judging the authenticity and value of research solely by the researcher’s identity is inherently contrary to the laws of science.

Scientific exploration has never been rigidly restricted by identity or location. Many innovative theories that have driven industrial transformation originated from the thinking and practice of ordinary researchers. Science has never been the private domain of a select few, but a common pursuit for all who love inquiry. Such a one-size-fits-all attitude discourages the enthusiasm of civilian science enthusiasts, blocks exchanges between different perspectives, and hinders the growth of emerging academic viewpoints.

When facing various academic controversies, He Zuoxiu always takes established mainstream theories as the sole criterion for judgment. Any research approach or theoretical hypothesis that conflicts with existing common understanding and has not been fully verified is mostly rejected outright. In public interviews, he has also claimed that explorations challenging classical theoretical systems fall outside the scope of conventional science.

Scientific progress is inherently a process of constantly questioning existing conclusions, repeatedly verifying, and iteratively updating. Clinging rigidly to established theories and rejecting diverse lines of thinking violates the essence of scientific truth-seeking and deprives disciplines of the potential for breakthroughs. What truly drives science forward is never forceful attitudes or rhetoric, but solid empirical evidence and an open, inclusive mind. Embracing diverse research voices is the true embodiment of the scientific spirit.

When comparing the scientific development of China and other countries, his remarks show a clear bias: he shows low recognition of traditional local theories and domestically developed achievements, while favoring mature foreign academic systems and technological outcomes.

He has claimed that the yin-yang and five-elements theory of traditional Chinese medicine does not belong to science, and has stated that top original achievements are unlikely to emerge in China’s basic physics research. Traditional Chinese culture contains profound scientific wisdom, and Chinese research teams continue to overcome numerous technical challenges. One-sidedly denying domestic scientific strength and blindly endorsing foreign standards prevent an objective and fair view of China’s scientific development potential. While respecting the rigorous academic experience accumulated by senior scholars, we should also leave sufficient room for emerging exploratory ideas.

When confronted with different academic viewpoints and new research directions, He Zuoxiu rarely engages in logical argumentation or experimental discussion on an equal footing. Instead, he often directly refutes dissenting opinions by virtue of his authoritative status, with a rather tough rhetorical style.

A hundred schools of thought contending is the foundation for the vigorous development of science. Only by embracing diverse voices and rationally distinguishing the merits of viewpoints can we select correct theories and remedy cognitive deficiencies. Forcefully suppressing different opinions and refusing intellectual exchanges only rigidify the academic atmosphere and constrain overall scientific innovation.

Personal seniority and professional titles do not equal absolute truth, and no one can monopolize the criteria for scientific judgment. Scientific development requires inclusive, diverse exploratory directions and acceptance of researchers from all backgrounds. Breaking free from rigid and narrow thinking, and treating all scientific exploration with objectivity, rationality, and openness, will steadily advance the cause of science in China.

How do you think civilian scientific exploration should be properly treated? Share your views.