为什么中国人缺乏创造力？ [美国媒体]

每人一小段，翻译我也行！
每日新素材，等你来认领！ http://www.ltaaa.com/translation/

-------------译者：Q__Q-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

‘Why Do Chinese Lack Creativity?’

为什么中国人缺乏创造力？




-------------译者：Q__Q-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

–]jingzi_factoryMongolia 38 指标 12小时前
No free speech --> rampant government corruption --> poor enforcement of laws such as IP --> no incentive to innovate.
The education system has flaws, students spend so much time learning useless information rather than experimenting and learning on their own, compounding this issue.
There's 88 other draw backs to the way things are done for different sectors (wechat is awesome and more people would use it if the government weren't so heavily involved in censorship and other shady shit, similar for other IT things).
Chinese people are definitely as smart and creative as their western counterparts, but the system needs to change to make better use of this. 

毫无言论自由——政府腐败猖獗——执法不严如知识产权方面——不鼓励创新
教育体制有缺陷，学生花费大量时间在学习无用的知识上而不是实践，自主学习以及解决问题上。
对于不同行业而言，仍然还有许多其他的缺陷。（微信很好用，但如果政府没有严密的审查以及做些其他暗地里的勾当，那么会有更多的人用微信，其他IT产业也类同）
中国人如同西方人一样的确很聪明也很有创造性，但是需要去改变体制以便更好得以发展。

[–]juzplanecrazieUnited States 19 指标 9小时前
Resourcefulness is creativity, and I've seen a lot of resourcefulness in China. 

才智就是创造力，我在中国见识过许许多多的聪明人。

[–]upads 20 指标 12小时前
The education, duh.
Chinese education looks for uniformity. There is one system, one syllabas and if you don't fit in, you die(leave).
People stereotype the Chinese a lot because they have created a system to make sure everyone fit in a stereotype.

中国的教育，我呸
中国的教育寻求的是同质化，只有一个体制，一个教学大纲，如果你不能适应，那就只能灭亡（离开）。
中国人循规蹈矩，因为他们已经创立了一种模式，以便确保每个人都能适应陈规旧习。

[–]JillyPollaTaiwan 4 指标 12小时前
I don't think it's so much education but the way the economic system is organized. Look at Japan, where they also have an exam based rote learning system, but they have no problem with creativity.

我不认为教育是很大原因，反而是经济体制的组织方式是原因。看看日本，日本人也有基于机械式学习模式的考试，但是他们在创造力方面就没啥问题。

-------------译者：Q__Q-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]upads 4 指标 10小时前
Ah, it's not the exam based rote learning system that's problematic, it's the approach to education----I can't explain it in words very well, watch BBC's "are our kids tough enough?" to get a feel.

额，不是基于考试的死记硬背学习系统出问题，而是教育的方法出问题——我无法用语言解释清楚，想对此了解一二的就去看看BBC的“我们的孩子足够坚强吗？”吧。

[–]pixelpiraterVietnam 8 指标 10小时前
While Japan's education is also based on rote learning, the emphasis is put on social order. Moreover, Japanese children are taught to be independent from an early age.
On the other hand, china does rote learning just for the sake of rote learning, which results in a high rate of cheating. The syndrome of little emperors also ensures that children from china keep relying on their parents, which reduces independence and creativity.

尽管日本的教育也基于机械式学习，但是强调的是顺服社会秩序。而且日本小孩子从幼年起就要学会独立自主。
另一方面，中国死记硬背学习仅仅就为了死记硬背学习，这导致了高频率的作弊，小皇帝综合症（独生子女心理问题）也导致中国的小孩子过度依赖他们的父母，减少了独立意识和创新思维。

[–]malariasucks 4 指标 4小时前
China really discourages independence as well

中国的确不鼓励独立。

[–]TommiHFinland 2 指标 3小时前
Yet Japan has freedom unlike China

然而不像中国，日本有自由。

-------------译者：Q__Q-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]crestind -3 指标 10小时前
All schools have syllabi and tests. That's not a reason.

所有的学校都有教学大纲以及各种考试。这不是原因。

[–]DarkSkyKnightUnited States[S] 7 指标 10小时前*
One can argue that education in China is exam-oriented, meaning the chief purpose of education is to ace exams.
This is a pretty weak point because it's hard to actually convincingly prove this, but based on my experience this is more so in China than in the West.
Regardless, in such a framework creativity is an afterthought.

 人们可能认为中国的教育是应试教育，意味着教育主要的目的是为了通过考试。
这种观点经不起推敲，因为事实上很难去证实使人信服，但是基于我的经历，比起西方在中国应试教育更普遍。
无论如何，在这种框架下的创新能力也只是事后诸葛亮。

[–]upads 2 指标 7小时前
The syllabi is, as pointed out by another redditor, not a problem, but the Chinese teacher's approach in education of the kids. It's hard to put it in words, so watch BBC.

网友指出的教学大纲不是问题，而是中国教师对孩子的教育方法上出了大问题。无法用语言讲清楚，去看BBC吧。

[–]hydr0xide 11 指标 12小时前
He (she?) briefly touched on the point towards the end of the article.
Maybe it's not that Chinese people lack creativity.
Maybe it's that the Chinese people who are creative leave China.
I wonder if the CCP will ever recognise this (doubtful, because it cuts right through to the legitimacy of one-party rule).

他（她？）简要的谈到了这篇文章的结尾
可能不是中国人缺乏创造力。
可能是有创造力的中国人离开了中国
我怀疑中共是否对此有所认识（很可疑，因为正是通过否认这一点，才能保有一党统治的合法性。）

-------------译者：op123258-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]TheMonkeyEmperor 5 指标 11小时前
Another reason is that in China any new idea/concept will be stolen within a matter of days and there is no way to enforce intellectual property.

另一个原因是，在中国，任何新的想法/概念都会在几天内被偷走，没有办法强制（保护）知识产权。

With this in mind, why bother? Just do whatever works for others right now, go along with the cash flow.

想到这一点，还有什么好忧愁的？只要能产生效益就可以，跟着资金走。

[–]DarkSkyKnightUnited States[S] 8 指标 13小时前*
Content:
http://puu.sh/kdcRR.jpg
http://puu.sh/kdcSB.png
http://puu.sh/kdcTp.png
http://puu.sh/kdcTW.png
http://puu.sh/kdcUy.png
http://puu.sh/kdcV0.png
‘Why Do Chinese Lack Creativity?’
In a popular Internet essay, one Chinese writer explains why the country remains behind the curve in innovation.

在一篇广为流传的网络文章中，一位中国作家解释了为什么这个国家在创新方面仍落后于时代的原因。

On June 19, the University of Washington and elite Tsinghua University in Beijing announced a new, richly funded cooperative program to be based in Seattle and focused on a topic that has become a sore point in China: innovation. Republican presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina’s comment in late May that Chinese “are not terribly imaginative” has been criticized as a sweeping judgment, but it highlighted a common perception both in the United States and in China itself — that the world’s second-largest economy is short on home-grown innovation, and on the business and academic cultures necessary to nurture it.

六月十九日，华盛顿大学和带有精英性质的清华大学的在北京宣布了一项新的、资助丰厚的，总部设在西雅图的合作项目，该项目的焦点是一个已经成为中国的“痛点”的话题：创新。共和党总统候选人菲奥莉娜-卡莉在5月底发表的评论中说，中国“不太有想象力”被批评为一种武断的判断，但它强调了一种在美国和中国国内都很普遍看法：世界上第二大经济体缺少本土创新，在商业文化和学术文化上都需要培育它（创新）。

It’s not for lack of trying. The Chinese government now pours billions of dollars annually into research and development — by one estimate, its research and development budget may surpass U.S. spending by 2019 — and Chinese President Xi Jinping has emphasized innovation in his speeches. For the past four years, China has filed more patent applications than any other country, although state news agency Xinhua has described the quality of those patents as “poor.”

这并不是因为缺乏尝试。根据某个评估，现在中国政府每年投入数十亿美元的资金到研究和发展中去，到2019年，它的研究和发展预算可能会超过美国，而且中国国家主席习近平在多次讲话中强调创新。在过去的四年里，中国已经比其他国家提交了更多的专利申请，尽管国家新闻机构新华社认为这些专利的质量“很差”。

Despite these efforts, the idea that Chinese don’t innovate continues to inspire soul-searching among Chinese web users. The following is taken from a popular post on question and answer forum Zhihu, originally posted in 2013 and titled “Why do Chinese lack creativity?” While the essay is anonymous, its popularity on the website and the hundreds of comments it garnered indicate that it resonated widely. Foreign Policy translates, with edits for brevity and clarity.

尽管有这些努力，中国人不创新的说法，继续激发着中国网民的自我反思。以下是摘自一个很受欢迎的问答论坛——知乎，最初发布在2013和题为“为什么中国缺乏创造力？“虽然这篇文章是匿名的，但是它在网站上受欢迎的程度以及成百条评论表明它引起了广泛共鸣。（此文由）《外交政策》翻译，为了简洁和清晰经过了一定的编辑。

-------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

As an innovator myself, I’ve thought about this question for a long time.
What is creativity? A much-cited April 2003 article published in the [academic] Creativity Research Journal states that “creativity involves the production of novel, useful products.” These can be both tangible objects as well as intellectual products such as an idea, an essay, or a process.
Chinese people do not lack creativity. Chinese-made novelty items, such as the combination cigarette case and cell phone [pictured here], are without a doubt one proof of our imagination. But if we do not lack ingenuity, then what keeps it from being widely recognized?
First, our innovations lack depth. Products such as the cigarette case/cell phone are what we can call combination-type innovation, simply merging the functions of two different products. It’s using someone else’s advanced technology in different circumstances. This kind of innovation has no technological barriers and is easily recreated or even surpassed by others. It relies on novelty to occupy a market; as soon as someone else does the same thing but with better execution, the market will quickly shrivel and price wars ensue.

作为一个改革者，这个问题我也想过很长时间。
创新是指什么？2003年发表在《Creativity Research Journal （创新性研究期刊）》（学术型期刊）上的一篇文章说“创新是指创造全新的、有用的产品”。既可以是实际的物品，也可以是抽象的智慧的产物，比如一个好点子，一篇文论或者一种工序。
中国人确实缺乏创新。中国人所谓的创新产品，比如香烟盒手机[图片]，仅仅只能证明人是有想象力的。若我们不对创新吹毛求疵，这种产品又怎么会得不到大家的认可呢？
首先，我们的创新缺乏深度。类似于香烟盒手机的这种产品可以被称为整合型创新，说白了就是把两个不同的产品所携带的功能整合在一个产品上。这种创新只是将别人的现有技术换件外皮使用罢了。这样的创新并没有技术难度，简单易行，也很容易被他人超越。这种创新所开辟的市场一旦遇到更好的同类产品，就会快速萎靡，继而陷入价格战的泥沼中。

-------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

In addition, our creativity has not reached industrial scale. An industry must reach a certain size before it can mobilize large-scale participation by outside enterprises such as chip, software, and interface design and algorithm research. Again using the cigarette case mobile phone as an example, we see that such an invention does not have any lasting influence on the further development of either cell phones or cigarette cases. With only this kind of superficial innovation, it’s impossible to construct an expansive industrial system, take the mobile phone industry to the next level, or draw more diverse companies into the cigarette case cell phone market (if this market actually exists).
We lack an environment conducive to creativity. Innovation is not something that a single person can accomplish by just closing the door and thinking hard. But Chinese are not good at using lively debate to turn a spark of originality into a developed idea, and Chinese companies aren’t skilled at using cooperation and competition, or “coopetition,” to innovate. Through cultural and political influence, we have developed the habit of forming alliances with each other, rather than engaging in coopetition driven by profit.
We also lack a rigorous scientific process. The road from an idea to a successful product requires countless runs through the scientific method. There are no shortcuts. But domestically, practitioners of popular science have been bad models. They’ve believed that they can create a so-called new scientific system, using various shortcuts to overturn laws of science and thus make great scientific discoveries. The Hanxin incident at Shanghai Jiaotong University — when a much-hailed computer chip unveiled by a Chinese academic in 2003 was later discovered to be fraudulent — was an “innovation” which clearly violated the laws of development. Innovation must constantly undergo the improvements that only come through ceaseless testing and feedback from the market.

另外，我们的创新并没有达到产业的规模。一个产业自身必须要达到一定规模后才能调动外部企业的参与，比如芯片，软件，接口设计以及算法研究。再看那个香烟盒手机的例子，这种发明既不会有什么持续影响也不会对香烟盒或者手机产业的发展有任何驱动力。它既不能扩展工业体系，也不能将手机产业带入下一个高度，或者是促使多元化的公司涉足香烟盒手机的市场（假如有市场的话）。
我们缺乏创新的土壤。创新不是靠个人闭门造车做出来的。然而，中国人并不擅长从活跃的辩论中获得升华的灵感，中国的公司也不懂如何去运用合作与竞争，或者说“合作性竞争”。由于文化和政策的影响，我们习惯于结为盟友而不是在利益的驱使下参与“合作性竞争”这种模式。
我们也缺乏的科学的过程。从一个想法到一个成功的产品，需要运用科学的方法做无数的尝试才能完成，毫无捷径可走。但是在国内，那些大众科学的参与者们展示的却都是一些反面例子。他们总寄希望于投机取巧一步登天，却无视了科学发展的规律。就像上海交大的“汉芯事件”--那个2003年发布的载满赞誉的计算机芯片最后竟是学术造假--这就是典型的违反了科学发展规律的例子。创新之路谈何容易，要通过无数次的测试以及市场的反馈才能趋于完善。

------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

According to one innovation index, China ranks 21 among the world’s 28 largest economies. So while China does possess a certain degree of originality, it clearly falls behind quite a number of countries. This is in keeping with the impression I’ve gotten from the large number of domestic and foreign patents I’ve examined. Most Chinese business and individual patents are either the combination type or simply a new external design. This demonstrates that our inventions remain at a relatively basic level.
Finally, I disagree very strongly with the idea that Chinese education kills creativity. An individual person’s creative ability cannot be killed. The most obvious counter example is the Chinese people who receive their education in mainland China and then go abroad, and are still able to make first-class contributions to innovation or academia. I am more willing to use the word “inhibit.” Education can indeed have an inhibiting effect upon creativity. Our culture and education is more suitable for cultivating engineers [rather than scientists]. Perhaps our country’s most top-notch individuals had the lucky opportunity to find a suitable environment to give their creativity full play, but for the creative development of most of the people in the country, educational and cultural factors have indeed harmed them. In this, we must not turn a blind eye, and we must not sell ourselves short.

根据一个创新性指数的结果，中国的创新性在全世界前28大经济体中的排名为21. 可以看出中国确实是具有一定程度的原创性，但还是落后于许多国家。这与我在审查了大量国内外专利后所得到的印象相符。大多数中国公司或者个人的专利要么是个结合型的创意，要么仅是个外观的设计。这说明我们的创新仍停留在相对初级的水平。
最后，我要强烈反对中国教育扼杀创新性的这种说法。一个个体的创新性是无法被扼杀的。最明显的反例就是，在大陆接受教育的中国人，出国后仍然可以在创新与学术方面做出卓越的贡献。我更倾向于用“抑制”这个词。教育确实会对创新产生抑制作用。我们的文化和教育更适合培育工程师[而非科学家]。也许只有最杰出的人才有机会去寻求一个能够释放他们创新性的环境，而对于其余的绝大多数人，创新性还是只能在这个环境中被教育和文化持续地抑制。对此，我们不能睁只眼闭只眼，我们也不能低估了自己。

-------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]FatBabyBrother 7 指标 11小时前
The extremely high cost of failure (social and economic) would be another major barrier.
Do not lose face, and to lose a job or fail word will spread quickly of your poor performance... because there are literally a million other people that can do the job.

还有一个主要的障碍，就是失败后所要付出的高昂代价（社会和经济上的）。
不能丢脸，会丢工作，以及失败了你的破事就会被传得谁都知道....因为有无数人可以胜任你的工作。

[–]somewhat_pragmatic 4 指标 8小时前
That's an interesting perspective I hadn't considered.
Science is the art of failing, and learning from it. If you can't do the first step, how can you ever hope to do the second? 

这个观点比较有趣，我确实没有考虑到。
科学可以说是一门不断跌倒和爬起的艺术。如果你连走都不会，怎么可能先学跑？

[–]crestind 8 指标 10小时前
Lack of social safety nets. Like if you come up with a brilliant invention for a Jump to Conclusions mat and blow your life savings on producing it and fail, you don't worry in the states. In China you're doomed. 

缺乏社会保障。在美国，成功了你就可以一步登天荣华富贵享用不尽，就算失败了也不必太过担忧。而在中国，你就惨了。

[–]dandmcdUnited States 3 指标 11小时前
That's easy, it's the education system of the teacher is always right, there is no open discussion or debate in classes, and everyone follows the rote learning system and only learns the ability to memorize, not create. Writing and composition is a joke, you only write what the teacher wants exactly, or just copy someone else. Children have no freedom to be creative, all their time is spent in studies 6 to 7 days a week, and Chinese pop culture is a joke so nobody has an opportunity to develop interests. Just to talk to a few young English speaking students, and the majority will be duller than a potato, and all answer your questions the same way, and lack creative interests outside what their parents force them to do (piano lessons, dancing, soccer). 

这很简单，就是因为教育系统里面老师是绝对权威，教室里跟本不存在讨论或争辩的余地，每个人都遵循死记硬背的教育方法，他们只学会了如何去背知识而不是创新。写作和作文简直就是个笑话，你只能写老师想要的，或者直接抄别人的得了。孩子们没有创新的自由，他们一周要花6到7天的时间学习，还有中国的娱乐文化也是个笑话，因为根本没人有机会去发展兴趣。你就去跟那些会说英语的年轻学生交流下吧，他们比土豆还呆滞，给你的答案都是千篇一律的。除了他们爹妈强迫他们去做的事（钢琴课，跳舞，足球），他们没有任何有点创意的兴趣。

[–]user64x 4 指标 9小时前
My father just opened a research arm of his factory in Vancouver, Canada. He is really dis-satisfied with the quality of the primary control systems his company buys in China. He said that while there's millions of engineers available for hire in China, it's very difficult to find people who could "push" the technology forward to the next level.

我父亲刚在温哥华为他的工厂开了一个研究机构。他对公司从中国采购的初级控制系统的质量非常不满意。他说尽管在中国有成千上万的工程师，也找不到谁有能力把技术向上推动一个台阶。

-------------译者：woshisizhuzhu-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]pssssssssssst 3 指标 7小时前
I think it's critical thinking skills that are not taught in Chinese schools that really hampers the students potential and their creativity. They are not taught to think outside of the box, but rather to think in one way. Critical thinking also means having a degree of freedom that China does not allow its people though. How can you do something new and exciting and worry about being punished by the government. If they had that freedom CCP would not exist.

我认为中国的学校没有对学生的批判思考能力进行培训，这样会限制中国学生的潜能和创造力。学校没有教学生跳出圈子去思考，反而让他们一根筋走到底。批判思考也意味着一定程度的自由主义，这是中国不允许的。当你的所作所为会被政府惩罚，你又怎么会做出新鲜的有创造力的事情呢？如果这些学生能有了这种自由，那么中共也就不存在了。

[–]jp599 6 指标 12小时前
China's education system does not recognize or reward creativity, and there can be significant risk in even exercising it. Talk to some students about an essay sometime... They will actually write the essay with the conclusion the teacher wants them to have. They are expected to conform and are rewarded for conforming.

中国的教育不认可和鼓励创造力，因为行使这种创造力本身可能带来风险。和这些中国学生谈论他们的文章。他们在写的文章实际上是老师想要的结果。当他们和预计的结果相符时，他们就能因合格而获得奖励。

This extends to politics, too. There is a correct view of history and an incorrect view of history. Students should avoid "unhealthy" views, which are of course those contradicting the national narrative. As long as this view of history and orthodoxy remains, it's hard to allow and reward critical thinking in the classroom.

当延伸到政治领域，这就有正确的和不正确的历史观。学生应该尽量避免这些能引起国家叙事矛盾的“不健康”观点。只要这些传统和正统的观念一直存在，就很难在学校里允许和鼓励批判性的思考。

On the other hand, teachers in the West are constantly trying to get students to see the broader picture, or encouraging them for writing novel essays or expressing novel opinions. It's no wonder westerners learn that critical thinking and creativity are valuable. Even if the end result is shitty, if it's at least original, we can value it for that alone.

另一方面，在西方社会，老师会试图不断地让学生看到更广阔的画面，或者鼓励他们写一些新潮的散文或者表达新潮的思想。西方人学习批判性思维和创造力是值得的，这也就不足为奇了。甚至最终的效果并不好，但只要她是原创的，那么也能珍惜它，因为它的独一无二。

In general, China tends to esteem performance and virtuosity, whereas the West tends to esteem originality and ingenuity. Have you ever watched some of China's music students? They can play classical pieces with incredible precision. China's songwriters, on the other hand...？

通常来讲，中国更尊重性能和精湛的技艺，而西方国家更尊重独创性和创造力。你如果观察一下中国的音乐学生，他们能非常准确地弹奏经典曲目，但是另一方面，中国的曲作者在哪里？

[–]DarkSkyKnightUnited States[S] 3 指标 10小时前
From what I've seen, the best gaokao essays are still those that are heartfelt and truthful... meaning people who literally believe the same things as the graders.

在我看来，最好的高考作文仍然是要发自内心的、具有真情实感的，这意味着人们要像学生那样，才能真正地体会这些事情的含义。

[–]pixelpiraterVietnam 2 指标 13小时前
IMO it's mostly because of the rigid, centralized political system.

我认为这主要归因于严厉的、集权的政治体系。

Creativity and diversity of philosophy were booming in china before its unification by Qin dynasty since each state followed its own way. After the burning of books and burial of scholars, innovation on a grand scale pretty much died. Tang dynasty was a bit more open so it stood out in its achievements, others not so much.

在秦朝一统中国之前，哲学思想的原创性和多样性是非常繁荣的（诸子百家争鸣），因为每一个国家都在沿着自己的方向前进。随后，就焚书坑奴，大规模的的创新就很大程度地消失了。和其他朝代相比，唐朝能好点，应为它更加的开放，其他的朝代都不怎么地。

-------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]upads 5 指标 12小时前
Song Dynasty actually had quite some insane progress in innovation and scienticfic.

实际上宋朝在科学与创新方面有很多了不起的进展。

[–]impossinatorHong Kong 3 指标 11小时前
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_of_the_Song_dynasty
Technology knows no borders, but the scientific method is a western invention. Sorry, but it's a fact. There was no such thing as "Chinese science"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_of_the_Song_dynasty

技术无国界，然而科学方法却是西方人发明的。不好意思，这就是事实。从来没有“中国的科学”这种东西。
（译者：翻完了才发现是HK的，希望是HK的外国人，因为我有点恶心到了。）

[–]upads 5 指标 10小时前
They did use the same methodology the westerns use to achieve many thing. It's not Chinese science. It's just "science", same as what the globe is doing is.
I was stating that Song Dynasty has a lot of scientific progress. 

他们的成就确实离不开与西方一样的方法学。但这不叫“中国的科学”。这就叫“科学”，放之四海而皆准。
我只是想强调宋朝确实取得了科学上的进步。

[–]Smirth 0 指标 10小时前
Ok sorry if I missed something, it's a really long Wikipedia article.
I do not doubt for a second that the Song Dynasty had some pretty awesome technology for its time.
But, making "scientific progress" is not about making things. Technology is not the same as science. Gunpowder is not scientific progress. A mechanical clock is not scientific progress. Even an electric kettle is not scientific progress. This is just a very very very advanced form of rubbing two sticks together.
Understanding chemical oxidation and reduction processes is progress in science. The theory of evolution is progress in science. Understanding the photoelectric effect is progress in science. The laws of thermodynamics are progress in science.
So, the question is, did the Song Dynasty folks, clever as they were, use the actual scientific method to build their technology?
Meaning, make observations, make a hypothesis, make testable predictions, test those predictions, and make a general theory? (simplifying a bit).
Or was it extremely skilled engineering - without necessarily understanding the theory of why it worked?
As far as I know, the concept of the scientific theory has only occurred (and survived) once in humanities history. If the Song had it and lost it, then it's the greatest loss China has ever suffered.

好吧，如果我有些东西没看到，那么不好意思。因为这篇维基百科的文章实在是太长了。
我好不怀疑宋朝在技术上所取得的伟大进展。
但是，取得“科学进展”不是制造几样东西那么简单。技术不是科学。火药不是科学进展。机械表也不是科学进展。甚至电水壶也不是，因为它只是两只棒子（译者：指热水壶中的加热电阻）连在一起的高级形式。
搞清楚氧化还原反应的过程才是所谓的科学进展。进化论是科学进展。光电效应也是科学进展。热力学三大定律都是科学进展。
那么，问题来了，那些聪明的宋朝的子民们，曾否运用过科学的方法去构建他们的技术呢？
我的意思是，他们是否有自己的观点，做出过假设，验证过假设，得到过普遍规律？（已经很简化了）
还是他们只是超级熟练的工匠而已--他们对与自己的工作没有所需的理论基础。
据我所知，科学理论这个概念在人类历史上只产生过（并且幸存下来了）一次。如果这个概念曾在宋朝产生过，而后又消亡了，那么我只能说，这是中国历史上最大的损失。

-------------译者：一日不语-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]upads 5 指标 7小时前
What you defined "science", was exactly what was going on in Song Dynasty. Bridges, canels, were all carefully engineered, calculated and drawn up with engineering drawings and circuit diagrams. Yes, Circuit fucking diagrams. And their astrology was not "Oh this star is eastern fire rabbit" bullshit. It's "Let's observe the movement of the moon and stars for years and years and see if we can come up with some theorm that proves the earth is round."
Understanding the concept of magnetic field IS science, and it was first discovered by a team of researchers who were funded directly by the palace.
That's just how insane people were back then.
And yes, all were lost after the Northerners invaded until modern day archeologists dig them back up.

你所定义的“科学”恰恰就是在宋朝发生的事。桥梁，隧道，运河（译者：原文中的canels应为canals）都是经过工程学的设计，计算并进行过线路图的绘制。是的，TMD线路图。并且他们的星相学也没说过“啊，星星就是东方的火兔”这种弱智话。他们所做的就是希望通过多年对月亮和星星的运动轨迹的观察来得到或者证明地球是球形的结论。
弄明白磁场就是科学！而且首次获得这个发现的团队还是皇家赞助的。
上面这些才是那时候的人们所做的事。
是的，所有的一切都在北方民族入侵后玩完了，直到今日，考古学家才将这些大白于天下。

[–]Smirth 3 指标 6小时前
Lady upads, I respect you enormously. Not arguing for the sake of arguing. I am asking you questions because you can read original sources, whereas my Chinese is only at the level of understanding China Mobile's latest upgrade plan.
However, engineering, technology, even knowledge is not the same as the scientific method. Making a device that is still used today, or figuring out the earth is round, making super clever diagrams -- this is not the same as scientific theories. Scientific theories attempt to explain why, they don't just make gadgets.
If you told me "the Song Dynasty astronomers predicted the existence of Neptune" then we are talking about science because this was a planet that had never been seen but could be predicted by general rules and observations of other planets .
If you say "The Song astronomers built a really complicated machine to mimic the movements of the known celestial bodies" then they are just engineers (no offence I am an engineer).
What do you mean when you say "Understanding the concept of magnetic field IS science, and it was first discovered by a team of researchers who were funded directly by the palace."
What does that mean? They had a theory of what causes magnetism? They tested that theory? That's the bit I haven't seen...
Song Dynasty tech is cool and amazing but so far I haven't seen it as science.

upads小姐，我非常的尊重你。我们不要为了争论而争论。我问你问题是因为你读得懂最原始的资料，而我最多只能看懂我的中国手机里的最近更新计划。
不过，工程，技术甚至知识，都不能等同于科学方法。即使制造了时至今日仍在使用的装置，弄清楚了地球是圆的，或者说绘制了极为巧妙地图谱--这些都不是科学理论。科学理论是试图去解释为什么，而不只是制造些什么。
如果你告诉我“宋朝的天文学家预测到了海王星”，那么我们才是在讨论科学，因为海王星从来没有被人看到过，因此只能根据一些普遍规律和对其他行星的观察来预测。
如果你说“宋朝的天文学家制造了十分复杂的仪器来模拟已知的天体运动”，那我们说的还只是工程。（不不是冒犯，因为我自己也是个工程师）
你所说的“弄明白磁场就是科学！而且首次获得这个发现的团队还是皇家赞助的。”这句话是什么意思？你是指他们已经弄明白磁场产生的理论了吗？他们验证过他们理论吗？请恕我孤陋寡闻。
宋朝的技术的确非常了不起，然而目前为止我还是没看到什么可以堪称科学的东西。

-------------译者：Q__Q-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

[–]derintellectual 0 指标 5小时前
Their innovation was based on survival and keeping Chinar powerful.

他们的创新是基于生存和保持中国强大而言的。

[–]DarkSkyKnightUnited States[S] 3 指标 12小时前
Yup.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_of_the_Song_dynasty

是的
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_of_the_Song_dynasty

[–]upads 1 指标 12小时前
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 

那仅仅是冰山一角而已

[–]seilgu 1 指标 44 minutes ago
I don't think Chinese lack creativity. Look at what English teachers in China have accomplished, hm, not so creative right?
Anyway my point is, America has many high-risk startup companies, take the example of Labcyte, which uses ultrasonic sound to manipulate droplets for use in the biotech industry. Now imagine some Chinese startup was doing that, does it feel weird? Yes, but why? It's not Chinese people aren't smart enough to think of the technology, it's that the economic environment just isn't ready for that. First it needs a booming biotech industry, and second it needs infrastructure to encourage people to take risks and protect them when it fails.
Also there are too much money to be made in China that are low-hanging fruits because of the huge market, you don't need to risk that much to create something entirely new.
Also, can any of you give some really good 'creativity' coming from western countries? Kickstarter doesn't count. 

我不认为中国人缺乏创造力。看看在中国的英语老师实现了什么，不是很有创造力吗？
无论如何我的观点是这样的，美国有很多高风险的创业公司，例如Labcyte公司，这家公司用超声波操控液滴应用于生物技术产业。现在想象下一些中国创业公司也这样做，不觉得怪吗？是的，但是为什么？不是因为中国人不够聪明无法想到这技术，而是因为经济环境还没准备好。首先需要爆炸性的生物科技产业支持，第二需要完善的基础设施，以便鼓励人们敢于冒险以及在创业失败时能起到保护网的作用。
由于中国市场巨大，所以容易赚钱的地方很多，所以没必要冒巨大的风险去创造全新的东西。你们能列举出某个来自西方国家的非常好的”创意“吗？Kickstarter（众筹网站）不算

[–]TommiHFinland -1 指标 3小时前
No freedom 

因为毫无自由

[–]wansuiwansui -4 指标 11小时前
Not just creativity but also intelligence

缺的不仅仅是创造力而且还包括智力

[–]rootfiend -1 指标 6小时前
wow, their site is really spammy

哇喔，他们的网站就是个垃圾东西

[–]wangpangu -4 指标 10小时前
This again...?

又来一次？