Cultural history holds back Chinese research

[xizhimen]

China achieved a lot of world engineering miracles,in a short span of only 2 decades,we build world longest and fastest railway systems,high speed train system,subway systems,highway systems,we built world biggest ports ,airports,bridges,most tallest skyscrapers....so we are bad in engineering,ok,wish you Indians good luck

 

[gambit]

China achieved a lot of world engineering miracles,in a short span of only 2 decades,we build world longest and fastest railway systems,high speed train system,subway systems,highway systems,we built world biggest ports ,airports,bridges,most tallest skyscrapers....so we are bad in engineering,ok,wish you Indians good luck

None of those are true innovations. They are only extensions of tried and true methods.

 

[xizhimen]

None of those are true innovations. They are only extensions of tried and true methods.

but we made the most of them in the world,to greatly benefit our people,that's the most important matter,to benefit the people,and how come other countries dont do those things..or can't do those things?

 

[gambit]

but we made the most of them in the world,to greatly benefit our people,that's the most important matter,to benefit the people,and how come other countries dont do those things..or can't do those things?

Those are different issues. This is about China's institutional inertia against innovations.

 

[below_freezing]

I'd say its mostly bull$hit. I bet if you said blacks cannot innovate, or Jews cannot innovate, then there would be cries of racism. But when its Chinese can't innovate, heh, you get awarded with a Nature publication.

The problem they described was nothing of the sort that "Chinese cannot innovate" either. Its the typical problem of too many people want to be generals, not enough grunts.

 

[gambit]

I'd say its mostly bull$hit. I bet if you said blacks cannot innovate, or Jews cannot innovate, then there would be cries of racism. But when its Chinese can't innovate, heh, you get awarded with a Nature publication.

I can say Zimbabwe have not been innovative and no one can bring charges of racism. There are plenty of black scientists and engineers in America, but there is only one country call 'Zimbabwe'. And no one said Chinese cannot innovate, the argument is institutional inertia against risk taking and tolerance for failures in China. When you resort to distorting the basic premise of the discussion, it mean you have no argument.

 

[below_freezing]

I can say Zimbabwe have not been innovative and no one can bring charges of racism. There are plenty of black scientists and engineers in America, but there is only one country call 'Zimbabwe'. And no one said Chinese cannot innovate, the argument is institutional inertia against risk taking and tolerance for failures in China. When you resort to distorting the basic premise of the discussion, it mean you have no argument.

That is not what the original article said. The original article said that scientists in China were reluctant to share power because each wanted to be the leader, and no one wanted to be the follower.

 

[gambit]

That is not what the original article said. The original article said that scientists in China were reluctant to share power because each wanted to be the leader, and no one wanted to be the follower.

Here...

Cultural history holds back Chinese research : Nature News & Comment

...but discouraged curiosity, commercialization and technology.

At one point in history, China was the world's undisputed leader in scientific exploration and achievements. What happened? The Western companies formed their opinions of current China based upon current relationships, not what happened thousands of years ago when China was said leader. What I said was true and it is in line with many people's observations of China: That there is a high institutional inertia against risk taking and low tolerance for failures from said risk taking. Scientific explorations involves risks and failures.

 

[skyknight]

None of those are true innovations. They are only extensions of tried and true methods.

We are still far behind the West in high tech, so we are focusing on catching up with the west as soon as possible。
Innovation is not the most important thing to China for the time now。
I have enough confidence that 10 years later China will make big progress in innovation

 

[gambit]

We are still far behind the West in high tech, so we are focusing on catching up with the west as soon as possible。
Innovation is not the most important thing to China for the time now。
I have enough confidence that 10 years later China will make big progress in innovation

This is where I disagree. If anything, China should focus on innovations. The business models of Apple, Intel, and others had during economic down cycles, innovations became high priority so they can better grasp opportunities when the cycle goes up again. It worked over and over. Innovations convince investors like nothing else.

 

[CommonCause]

A lot of people here don't understand where innovation/invention comes from.

Innovation is simply putting existing ideas together to form a new idea. This means the more existing ideas you are aware of, and the more time you have to test them, the more chances you can come up with something new. It's a very logical process.

I really don't care for words that have no meaning, like "creativity."

I think China is going about the right way. You get to where everyone is at, then you start moving ahead. That's how everyone's done it. All the nations today including the US started somewhere. China's industries also have a lot balance. They're all sort of growing together. It's not like India, where some industries are world class, while other lag far behind.

 

[below_freezing]

A lot of people here don't understand where innovation/invention comes from.

Innovation is simply putting existing ideas together to form a new idea. This means the more existing ideas you are aware of, and the more time you have to test them, the more chances you can come up with something new. It's a very logical process.

I really don't care for words that have no meaning, like "creativity."

I think China is going about the right way. You get to where everyone is at, then you start moving ahead. That's how everyone's done it. All the nations today including the US started somewhere. China's industries also have a lot balance. They're all sort of growing together. It's not like India, where some industries are world class, while other lag far behind.

thank you for making sense. very few people know what innovation is nowadays, including Chinese.

 

[no_name]

I don't see Chinese as lacking innovation. What I see that is lacking but catching up to the west is a systematic, structured way of releasing that innovative force through improved education/learning technique, training, and redirection into science and other proper areas.

I see it more as a swimmer improving his techniques, rather than having to be told how to swim.

 

[ao333]

repost deleted

 

[ao333]

Innovation is what Chinese are not. It's ingrained in the Chinese education system to memorize your way to success and copy others when you can't.

A lie propagated by Chinese nationalists.


Korean nationalists claim he wasn't Chinese, since he came from Shang Dynasty, the non-Chinese kingdom. That's all.


Another lie propagated by Chinese nationalists. You can repeat the lie 1000 times but that doesn't make it true, rather you make a fool out of yourself for claiming what is obviously a lie in the eyes of others.

May I point to that the South Korean flag is a rip off of Chinese Daoism? Or do you have to claim that Daoism was invented in Korea too?