Academician He is a little floating. Don't think that you know everything just because you are an academician, just like Trump. Speaking unprofessionally will make people feel that they are the spokesperson of a certain interest.
Academician He Xiuxiu is a great scientist who dares to tell the truth at the critical moment of history and has made great contributions. Is the pillar of the country!
Academician He played an important role in opposing pseudoscience and heresy. But when the spring breeze is proud, there is no need to imply that you are superior. It is also very inappropriate to arbitrarily classify Chinese medicine as "pseudoscience" just by grasping some mistakes in ancient Chinese medicine books. If we look back, when the wind of "psychic powers" was rampant, Americans were very disapproving (although it did not prevent the United States from sheltering some "psychic masters" in the future). In addition, the mainstream medical community in the United States holds a "suspicion and use" attitude towards Chinese medicine. On the one hand, they tried their best to collect Chinese medicine prescriptions, on the other hand, they said that Chinese medicine was "unscientific". China's intellectuals, especially western medicine, basically agree with the American approach. It is an obvious example that some western medicine experts openly cooperate with Fang to discredit Chinese medicine. Fang does not advocate Chinese medicine (TCM)! I wonder if Academician He is also affected by this?
He knows everything except physics.
I feel a bit like a square.
When we need to evaluate an academician, we can generally refer to the way of listening to his words and deeds, but no matter how the method is, how to evaluate objectively needs to be based on facts, and all conclusions must be based on conclusive facts. For example, we can see a certain side of Academician He from his published papers. Just look at the abstract of the paper.
Objectively speaking, we can find that this paper of Academician He demonstrates the political thought of social science across borders through the development history of professional physics.
Social science is also a science. Since it is a science, we should pay attention to professionalism and rigor. Here, there is no problem with the development history of quantum mechanics and the political thought proved in this paper. The real problem is how the author uses the means and methods of social science to demonstrate the relationship between the former and the latter. Is it induction? Deduction? Statistical survey?
Academician or expert, leaving your major is a layman! How to make people clear with their own vagueness?
The greatest academician.
If every academician is like He, then don't set up an academy of sciences. Academician is an expert, not an alien. Impetuous, self-righteous, harm others and harm yourself. As a theoretical physicist, I can't understand non-professional Chinese medicine, but I must not talk nonsense! It harms the public and the country.