The appropriate object of academic criticism should be academically controversial.

Several taboos in academic debates:

1. Favoring foreigners

When participating in academic debates, many people do not know how to present facts and reason. I like to talk about foreign countries. In fact, science has no national boundaries. Although foreign countries are advanced in some aspects, it does not mean that foreign countries are advanced in all aspects. Science respects practice, not foreign countries, and foreign countries also have pseudoscience.

An early paper I wrote was quickly rejected by the publication. The reviewer’s reason was that “there is no such formula in foreign books.” Later (after changing reviewers), although the paper was It has also been published, but I can never think highly of this expert.

2. Quoting scriptures

In fact, it is dogmatism or bookism. When many people argue with me, they often point to textbooks. In fact, the things in textbooks are past knowledge and cannot be completely used as criteria for new theories. If everything in the past is correct, do people still need to make progress? What's more, many of the things in textbooks are wrong.

3. Subjective conjecture

Science is an objective law, not a conclusion drawn from subjective conjecture (taken for granted), but many people are used to conjecture and like to let the objective world follow their own logic Running, it is also common to say "I think it should be this way" in arguments.

In fact, doing so goes against scientific principles and is unlikely to bring about real scientific progress. For example, it is often said in petroleum geology that mudstone cannot migrate out after hydrocarbon generation. The pressure is held in the mudstone to form an overpressure formation, and then the formation is fractured, and the oil and gas migrate out through the fractures.

4. Personal attacks

The worst academic argument is the personal attack. Some people do not directly discuss scientific issues, but blindly throw dirty words and curse words at each other, and try their best to belittle each other's knowledge. What will be the result? It can only be resentful, causing everyone to break up unhappy.

Personal attacks have gone far beyond the academic debate itself and should fall into the category of morality. Rational arguments will please everyone, while irrational arguments will anger everyone and are detrimental to both themselves and others.