方舟子致英国《自然》：对学术不端行为缺乏处理激发了网上的指控
22 06 2006年
方舟子致英国《自然》：对学术不端行为缺乏处理激发了网上的指控
（按：原文为英文，登在英国《自然》2006年6月22日）
主编先生：
我做为新语丝网站 (http://www.xys.org)
——这个被贵刊的特别报道《出
名与耻辱》（《自然》441,
392-393;2006）称为“指控不端行为的关注中心”
的网站的负责人，想对报道中提到的“有人担心文革式迫害”表示异议。
——这个被贵刊的特别报道《出
名与耻辱》（《自然》441,
392-393;2006）称为“指控不端行为的关注中心”
的网站的负责人，想对报道中提到的“有人担心文革式迫害”表示异议。
文化大革命是毛主席在1966年发动，并在1976年随着他的死亡而正式结束的。
虽然30年已经过去了，但是有关这场浩劫的记忆在许多中国人的心中仍然栩栩如
生——因此可以理解有些人会担心悲剧有一天会重演。但是把互联网上的言论
自由与文化大革命的暴行相比，是非常荒谬的。文革是由独裁者发动，不允许有
任何的自由，并且包括了政府对“阶级敌人”实行的迫害。我觉得很有讽刺意味
的是，120名美国华人科学家和自诩的人权斗士签了一封向中国政府呼吁压制媒
体和舆论的公开信：这些人还需要去学学言论自由和人权是什么意思。
我同意中国应该建立一个调查不端行为的指控的正式渠道。事实上，我早在
2001年，在向加州大学圣地亚哥分校中国学生学者联谊会发表的演讲中就提出了
这样的建议（见
http://www.xys.org/xys/netters/Fang-Zhouzi/science/yanjiang.txt）。但
是在有这样的渠道之前，以及在它建立以后为了确保它恰当地运作，新闻自由和
言论自由是必不可少的。
Correspondence
Nature 441, 932 (22 June 2006) | doi:10.1038/441932a;
Published online
21 June 2006
Misconduct: lack of action provokes web accusations
Published online
21 June 2006
Misconduct: lack of action provokes web accusations
Shi-min Fang1
1. New Threads Chinese
Cultural Society, PO Box 26194, San Diego,
California 92196, USA
Cultural Society, PO Box 26194, San Diego,
California 92196, USA
Sir:
As the webmaster of New Threads (http://www.xys.org) — the website
“at the centre of concerns over claims of misconduct”, according
to
your Special Report “Named and shamed” (Nature 441, 392–393; 2006)
—
I cannot agree with your comment that “some fear persecution
reminiscent of that used in the Cultural Revolution”.
“at the centre of concerns over claims of misconduct”, according
to
your Special Report “Named and shamed” (Nature 441, 392–393; 2006)
—
I cannot agree with your comment that “some fear persecution
reminiscent of that used in the Cultural Revolution”.
The Cultural Revolution was started by Chairman Mao in 1966
and
formally ended with his death in 1976. Although 30 years have
passed,
the memory of this calamity is still vivid in many Chinese minds —
it
is understandable that some fear the tragedy might someday recur.
But
it is ridiculous to compare free speech on the Internet to
the
violence of the Cultural Revolution, which was controlled by a
dictator,
allowed for no freedom and included governmental persecution of
‘class
enemies’. I find it ironic that 120 Chinese-American scientists
and
self-appointed human-rights advocates have signed an open
letter
appealing to the Chinese government to suppress media and
public
opinions: they still need to learn what free speech and human
rights
mean.
and
formally ended with his death in 1976. Although 30 years have
passed,
the memory of this calamity is still vivid in many Chinese minds —
it
is understandable that some fear the tragedy might someday recur.
But
it is ridiculous to compare free speech on the Internet to
the
violence of the Cultural Revolution, which was controlled by a
dictator,
allowed for no freedom and included governmental persecution of
‘class
enemies’. I find it ironic that 120 Chinese-American scientists
and
self-appointed human-rights advocates have signed an open
letter
appealing to the Chinese government to suppress media and
public
opinions: they still need to learn what free speech and human
rights
mean.
I agree that China should establish an official channel to
investigate
allegations of misconduct. In fact, I made this suggestion as early
as
2001, in a speech to the Chinese students and scholars association
at
the University of California, San Diego (see
http://www.xys.org/xys/netters/Fang-Zhouzi/science/yanjiang.txt).
But
before this channel exists, and to make sure it functions
properly
after it is established, free press and free speech are
indispensable.
investigate
allegations of misconduct. In fact, I made this suggestion as early
as
2001, in a speech to the Chinese students and scholars association
at
the University of California, San Diego (see
http://www.xys.org/xys/netters/Fang-Zhouzi/science/yanjiang.txt).
But
before this channel exists, and to make sure it functions
properly
after it is established, free press and free speech are
indispensable.
(XYS20060622)
