Why do intellectuals often preach anti scientific development and anti industrial values?

Tian Song, one of China's most well-known philosophers, editor-in-chief of "The Course of Science", professor at the School of Philosophy of Beijing Normal University; Liu Huajie is a professor in the Department of Philosophy at Peking University. These two people have been anti-science for a long time and have said a lot of unbelievable things. What makes people even more unbelievable is that they are also experts in the so-called "Science Communication Center of Peking University".

This is ridiculous! Is this a science communication center? I think it's better to call it the "Peking University Against Science Center".

I have been following this so-called "center" for many years, and I have found that this concentration camp of people, science, people, and philosophers, since its establishment, has not done anything beneficial to the dissemination of science, but I have collected more than 100 of their glorious deeds against science. Especially this Tian Song, a noble man who said that "science is superstition", I always thought that he had a problem with his brain, and I don't know how he got mixed up with a professor in the philosophy department. This is one of the reasons why I have always looked down on philosophy.

An old-fashioned anti-science god, with inferior knowledge and abnormal spirits, who cannot produce any reliable academic achievements worth mentioning, and who are not helpful to social progress, can become a dignified university professor in Beijing, which shows how low the threshold of the philosophical community is, and it can also be seen that there are many magic sticks in the philosophical world.

Knowledge is meant to be refuted, just as it was previously proposed that the earth is round, of course I don't believe it. The truth can only be found in a great deal of rebuttal, discussion, and debate. Like, the balloon is actually oval.

They don't understand rural life. They don't understand how difficult it is for farmers to harvest grain when there are no harvesters. They don't understand how tiring it is to get up at 4 o'clock in the morning to harvest wheat and go home at 7 o'clock in the evening.

They don't understand how much effort it takes to dig out the lotus root from the mud more than a meter deep. They don't understand what it feels like for the old farmer to walk in the field to pick up the little bit of rice ears that have not been cleaned, pick up three or five catties a day, and be so tired that he can't get up the next day. ‍‍

For the wealthy, the words "idyllic life" are like a day trip to a farmhouse. Walk around the fields twice, touch the fish in the river, go back to the house for a peasant meal, and breathe in the fresh air mixed with the smell of grass and. If they want to retreat to the countryside, it is also to build a large villa in the countryside, and the house is fully air-conditioned.

Build a pond in the yard and swim and fish in the summer. I eat all kinds of vegetables myself, and I still buy the staple food. Hire a nanny to serve tea and pour water, and live a small life like a master in the old days. ‍‍

They have never starved, never escaped famine, and never eaten the bark of Guanyin soil. They never paid rent to the landlords, nor did they pay public grain to the county government. They didn't sell their sons and daughters for three or five dollars, and they didn't eat each other because they were so hungry that they lost their minds. They have lost their memories of the past.

The intellectual community referred to here is not the scientific community, but the circle of humanities scholars. Earlier, I mentioned the philosopher Tian Song, an anti-science cadre, who often preaches that "science is superstition". Recently, he has made a fuss again.

The word anti-science is a translation of the English word anti-science, and mostly refers to those who are skeptical of science Science welcomes skepticism and welcomes correction, but this should be based on the evidence that science relies on and not other nonsense!

The emergence of these values is a good thing. The progress of civilization begins with the contention of a hundred schools of thought, and develops from constant questioning and questioning. The imprisoned Zheke is a slave Zheke, who does not know how to think, let alone develop.

After all, everyone has their own opinions, so I don't think it will lead to any conflict if such opinions exist.

Because you don't know the cost of human beings frantically plundering natural resources and destroying the environment, so to speak, come out.

There is no authority and no universal truth in science! All have their use environment!

This singularity argument is about the possibility and possibly the conclusion of the upper and lower conclusions. So there was a problem with the correct identification.