早在2020年6月《自然》子刊就刊登了以《科学无国界》为题的评论文章，指出如果在应对疫情的时候，政府政策危险到生物学团队、研究者和学生的流动就会

 

The context of the saying "science has no borders, scientists have a homeland"Source: New ChinaThe discussion on science without borders has been brought back to the forefront since the New Crown Pneumonia outbreak.Back in June 2020 the Nature sub-journal published an opinion piece under the title "Science without borders" , pointing out that if government policies in response to the outbreak jeopardize the mobility of biology teams, researchers, and students it will affect the development of science and innovation.

新冠肺炎疫情以来，关于科学无国界的讨论再次引发大家的关注早在2020年6月《自然》子刊就刊登了以《科学无国界》为题的评论文章，指出如果在应对疫情的时候，政府政策危险到生物学团队、研究者和学生的流动就会影响到科学的发展和创新。

海森堡

Werner Karl Heisenberg

沃纳·海森堡If we search the Chinese Internet for the phrase in the title, the probability is that we will get the phrase was said by Louis Pasteur or Ivan P Pavlov. In this article, we will go back to history to find out whether they said such words and how they were expressed, whether history can give us some insights into such expressions, where the philosophical implications and line of thought behind them come from, and what unknown secrets todays sociology and science policy will tell us?

如果我们在中文互联网搜索标题这句话，大概率会得到这句话是巴斯德（Louis Pasteur）或者是巴普洛夫（Ivan P Pavlov）说的本文将回归历史，探究他们是否说过这样的话，又是如何表述的，对于这样的表述，历史能否给我们一些启示，其背后的哲学蕴含和思想脉络从何而来，今天的社会学和科学政策又会告诉我们哪些不为人知的秘密呢？。

奥本海默

Julius Robert Oppenheimer

罗伯特·奥本海默In 2019, China Daily (Overseas Edition) pointed out in "Dont underestimate the conscience of scientists"[2] that Chinese scientists have shown their solidarity and strength when it comes to national interests and general academic rules, which is why Pasteurs famous quote "Science has no borders, but scientists have their own homeland" has become particularly popular in Chinese internet social media. This is why Pasteurs famous quote "Science has no borders, but scientists have their own homeland" is particularly popular in Chinese social media. If you check, it is easy to find out that Pavlov did not say such a thing, and it was Pasteur who said something similar.

2019年，《中国日报（海外版）》在《不要低估科学家的良知》中指出，在涉及国家利益和一般学术规则时，中国科学家表现出了团结和力量，这也是巴斯德的名言 "科学没有国界，但科学家有自己的家园 "在中国网络社交媒体上格外流行的原因。

因此，巴斯德的名言 "科学没有国界，但科学家有自己的家园 "在中国网络社交媒体上格外流行如果查证一下，不难发现巴甫洛夫并没有说过这样的话，说过类似的话的是巴斯德

At a banquet in 1876, Pasteur stated: "I have been struck by two profound impressions, the first, that science has no frontiers, and the second, which seems to contradict the first, but is the direct expression of the first, that science is the highest expression of the personification of a nation. Science knows no borders because knowledge belongs to mankind and is the torch that illuminates the world. Science is the highest personification of a nation because that nation will always be the first to spread the fruits of thought and intellect the farthest. The conviction that one has attained the truth is one of the greatest pleasures that man can enjoy, and it becomes deeper at the thought that one has contributed to the honor of his country. Though science knows no boundaries, the scientist has a fatherland to which he must dedicate the effect of his work on the world."

1876年一次宴会上，巴斯德指出：“我有感于两个深刻的印象，第一，科学无国界，第二看起来与第一自相矛盾，但却是第一点的直接体现，即科学是一个国家人格化的最高体现科学无国界，因为知识属于人类，是照亮世界的火炬。

科学是一个国家的最高人格化，因为这个国家将永远是第一个把思想和智力的成果传播得最远的国家坚信自己已经获得了真理，这是人类所能享受的最大的快乐之一，而一想到自己为国家的荣誉做出了贡献，这种快乐就会变得更深。

尽管科学无国界，科学家有祖国，他必须把他的工作对世界的影响奉献给他的国家”

钱学森

Qian Xue Sen

钱学森回国The meaning expressed above is not quite the same as what we usually understand today, before saying these words, he emphasized that scientific research is not for the sake of honor, honor is just an added value, scientists can fight for the glory of the country, but the original intention of the scientists is not to achieve this glory, but for the purpose of discovery of new knowledge and dissemination, just as many scientists today say that the purpose of scientific research is not to obtain the Nobel Prize in general. But on August 10, 1884, he mentioned again at the Copenhagen Medical Congress: "We believe that science is neutral ...... science without borders. But although science has no borders, the scientist must bear in mind everything that can be done for the honor of his country. In every great scientist should be a great patriot." The meaning expressed here is much closer to what we understand today.

上述表达的意思和我们今天通常理解的不太一样，在说这些话之前，他强调了科学研究不是为了荣誉，荣誉只是附加价值，科学家可为国争光，但科学家的初衷并不是为了实现这种荣光，而是为了发现新知并进行传播，正如今天很多科学家说科学研究的目的并不是为了获得诺贝尔奖一般。

但在1884年8月10日，他在哥本哈根医学大会上再次提到：“我们认为科学是中立的……科学无国界但是，尽管科学无国界，科学家必须牢记一切可以为国家的荣誉而努力的东西每个伟大的科学家身上都应该是伟大的爱国者。

”这里表达的意思则更为接近我们今天的理解

邓稼先

DengJia Xian

邓稼先与家人This statement was widely spread in the Western world, for example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt said in a speech at the National Institute of Health (NIH) in 1940 [5], "The NIH speaks of universal humanism. Throughout its long and distinguished history it has been committed to the promotion of the health of all mankind, and in this it is not limited by national boundaries and realizes that there is no difference in race, creed, or color." In 1965, Science magazine published an article by Wilder Penfield, President Emeritus of the Montreal meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), a Canadian-American neurobiologist, who reviewed the history of the U.S. and Canada and scientific exchanges in this message entitled "Science Without Borders," stating : "Science knows no borders, and only science can teach nations, by rule and example, how to live together, cooperate, and communicate. Scientists themselves are sometimes excellent ambassadors."

这种说法在西方世界广为传播，例如罗斯福（Franklin Delano Roosevelt）总统1940年在美国国立卫生研究院（National Institute of Health，NIH）演讲时说[5]：“NIH讲求普遍的人道主义。

在其漫长而杰出的历史中，它一直致力于促进全人类的健康，在这方面它没有受到国界的限制，并意识到种族、信仰或肤色没有差别”1965年,《科学》杂志发表了美国科学促进会（AAAS）蒙特利尔会议名誉主席怀尔德·彭菲尔德（Wilder Penfield）的文章，彭菲尔德是美籍加拿大神经生物学家，在这篇名为《科学无国界》的致辞中他回顾了美加两国历史和科学交流，指出：“科学是无国界的，只有科学才能通过规则和榜样来教导各国如何共同生活、合作和交流。

科学家本身有时就是优秀的大使”There are many more such examples; The Intellectual has published "When Science Without Borders Meets National Conflict" , an article reviewing the situation of prominent 20th century scientists between nations; Dave Webb from Leeds Beckett University in the UK and the Scientists for Global

Responsibility (SGR) organization ( Dave Webb) has written Scientists and War: 1916-2016 , an article that takes stock of scientists views on war and nationhood over the course of a century. The most prominent alternative here is Fritz Haber, a Jewish-German chemist who won the 1918 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for synthesizing ammonia. He is also known as the "Father of Chemical Weapons" because of his work in developing and deploying chlorine and other poisonous gases during World War I. By the end of World War I, more than 26,000 people had died as a result of Habers chemical weapons. He had a quote very similar to Pasteurs: "In time of peace, a scientist belongs to the world; in time of war, he belongs to his country."His opponent, on the other hand, was the French chemist François Auguste Victor Grignard, who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1912 for his invention of the format reagent, and who was mainly engaged in the manufacture and detection of phosgene and mustard gas in WWI. Thus the press rendered World War I as a showdown between the two Nobel Prize winners, but ignored the brutality of the war and the contradictions and entanglements of the scientists in the middle. In fact, Haber won the Nobel Prize when World War I was basically over, and Britain and France were quite skeptical about his winning the prize because of his performance in the First World War.

这样的例子还有很多，《知识分子》曾刊登《当科学无国界遭遇国家冲突》[7]一文回顾过20世纪著名科学家在国家之间的境遇；来自英国利兹贝克特大学和负有全球责任的科学家组织（Scientists for Global Responsibility,SGR）的戴夫·韦伯（Dave Webb）撰写了《科学家和战争：1916-2016》[8]，文章盘点了百年间科学家对战争和国别的看法。

这里面最突出的另类当属弗里茨·哈伯（Fritz Haber），他是犹太裔德国化学家，因合成氨而获得1918年诺贝尔化学奖因为在第一次世界大战期间他开发和部署氯气和其他毒气的化学武器工作，他也被称为“化学武器之父”，一战结束时，已有26000多人因哈伯的化学武器而死。

他有一句和巴斯德极为相似的名言：“在和平时期，一个科学家是属于全世界的；但在战争时期，却属于他的祖国”而他的对手，是法国化学家弗朗索瓦·奥古斯特·维克多·格林尼亚（François Auguste Victor Grignard），1912年因发明格式试剂获得诺贝尔化学奖，他在一战中主要从事光气、芥子气的制造和检测。

因此新闻界将一战渲染为两位诺贝尔奖得主的对决，却忽视了战争的残酷和科学家在中间的矛盾与纠结[9]，事实上哈伯获得诺贝尔奖是在一战基本结束的时候，英法等国也因为他在一战的表现对其获奖颇有质疑Habers own understanding was much like Oppenheimers later lament after the success of his Manhattan Project, "Now were all sons of bitches," but Oppenheimer was universally sympathized with, and Haber was treated more harshly. Not only did he donate the prizes he received to charity; after Hitler came to power, in 1934, unwilling to persecute fellow professors who were also Jews, Haber was forced to leave Germany and flee to Switzerland, where he

succumbed to another heart attack in January. As if by fate, his invention of poison gas was used extensively in concentration camps in World War II to kill and maim his fellow Jews.His family was also ill-fated. Habers first wife, Clara Helene Immerwahr, also a physical chemist in her early years, believed that Haber had "misunderstood science" and was "a manifestation of barbarism, corrupting the order that could have brought new insights into life..."and committed suicide by shooting herself on May 2, 1915. "and on May 2, 1915, committed suicide by raising a gun. A number of scholars have thus attributed Claras death to disapproval of what Haber had done in the war, with Dave Weber writing hyperbolically in his aforementioned article that Clara collapsed in the arms of his son Hermann Haber, who concealed Claras death, and that the next day he closed the door and traveled to the Eastern Front to deploy his chemical weapons. And while Hermann Haber committed suicide in 1946, often thought to be atonement for his fathers sins, it may also have been due to the tragic death of his wife in World War II. Hermans daughter, Claire Haber, also a chemist working on antidotes to chlorine gas, committed suicide by taking chlorine in 1949 after being told that the development of the atomic bomb was more important than her own research; the story of Clara and Claire is recaptured in the video-drama The Forbidden Zone, directed by Katie Mitchell.Lutz F. Haber, the child of Haber and his second wife, became a historical expert on World War I chemical weapons, authoring books such as The Poisonous Cloud.

哈伯自己的理解很像后来奥本海默的曼哈顿计划成功之后的感叹：“这下我们都是狗娘养的了”，但大家普遍对奥本海默报以同情，对哈伯则更为苛刻他不仅将自己获得的奖金捐献给慈善机构；希特勒上台后，1934年由于不愿意迫害同为犹太人的教授同行，哈伯被迫离开德国逃往瑞士，1月因心脏病再次发作而病逝。

仿佛造化弄人一般，二战中集中营大量使用他发明的毒气戕害他的犹太人同胞他的家人也命运多舛哈伯的首任妻子克拉拉·伊梅瓦尔（Clara Helene Immerwahr）早年也是一位物理化学家，认为哈伯“误解了科学”，是“野蛮的表现，败坏了原本可以给生活带来新见解的秩序”[10]，1915年5月2日举枪自杀。

不少学者因此认为克拉拉的死因就是不认同哈伯在战争中的所作所为，戴夫·韦伯在其前述文章中就夸张地写道，克拉拉倒在儿子赫尔曼·哈伯（Hermann Haber）怀里，哈伯隐瞒了克拉拉的死，第二天他关上门前往东方战线，部署了他的化学武器。

而赫尔曼·哈伯在1946年自杀，通常认为是为了其父亲赎罪，但也可能是因为妻子在二战中不幸去世赫尔曼的女儿莱尔·哈伯（Claire Haber）也是一名化学家，致力于研究氯气的解毒剂，因为被告知原子弹的研发比自己的研究更重要，1949年服氯化物自杀；凯蒂·米切尔导演的视频戏剧《禁区》（The Forbidden Zone）就再现了克拉拉和莱尔的故事。

哈伯和第二任妻子的孩子卢兹·哈伯（Lutz F. Haber）成为了研究一战化学武器的历史专家，撰有《毒云》（The Poisonous Cloud）等书There are reasons for us to carefully analyze the connotation of "science has no borders, but scientists have a motherland". Indeed, many of the previous

examples are in medicine and biology, and have already shown that one of the sources of "science without borders" is the Hippocratic Oath from ancient Greece, or in Chinese, the Healers Oath, the modern version of which, as part of the Geneva Declaration, has been revised from time to time to ensure that it keeps up with the times, as stated in the latest edition of the Geneva

Declaration of 2017: "I shall not tolerate discrimination on the basis of age, disease or disability. which states, "I will not tolerate considerations of age, illness or disability, creed, ethnicity, gender, nationality, political party affiliation, race, sexual

orientation, social status, or any other factor that comes between my duty and the patient."我们有理由仔细地辨析一下“科学无国界，但科学家有祖国”的内涵。

实际上，前面许多例子都是医学、生物学，已经显示出“科学无国界”其中一个来源，即来自古希腊的《希波克拉底誓言》，用中国的话说即医者仁心，其现代版本作为日内瓦宣言的一部分时常进行修订，以确保与时俱进，2017年最新版中写道：“我将不容许有年龄、疾病或残疾、信仰、民族、性别、国籍、政治党派、种族、性取向、社会地位或其他任何因素的考虑，介于我的职责与患者之间。

”

And in addition to the medical tradition there is another tradition, namely, the modern scientific tradition since Bacon. Modern science, in terms of its explanatory power, inherits and develops the position of Newtonian physics that science is universal and that the same

scientific laws apply wherever they are found. This is the content of the study of the metaphysics of science, the precursors of which can be traced back to the discussions of the scholars of solipsism, represented by Descartes, Leibniz, and Spinoza, and the scholars of empiricism, represented by Hume. We will not expand on it here, but only give a small example to illustrate the nature of this pervasive discussion. Liu Cixins Three Bodies 1: Once Upon a Time on Earth mentions the non-existence of physics, using a billiard-ball example from Asimovs famous "Billiard Balls", if two billiard balls (two prime points in physics) collide with the same initial velocity in different places at different times, and if the result of their collisions is predictable and the same every time, it means

that physics is not the same as physics, but the result of their collisions is the same every time. If two billiard balls (physically two masses) collide at different times and places with the same initial velocity, if the result of the collision is predictable, the same every time, it means that the laws of physics are universal (which means Laplaces Demon in Newtons worldview, which is the view of the theory-only scholars: the first principle should be absolutely certain and unquestionable, and the reasoning from the first principle should be absolutely certain and unquestionable), and if the result of the collision is unpredictable, with the same initial velocity, the result is actually random (which is the view of empirical scholars). , especially Hume, who directly denied causality).As philosophy has evolved, it has gone through the logical empiricism debate, which today has become a disagreement between neo-Humeanism and neo-Aristotelianism, i.e., the question of the distinction between the nature of inclination and the nature of straightforwardness, but this is not the main issue that we are facing and discussing today.

而除了医学传统之外还有另外一个传统，即自培根以降的近现代科学传统近现代科学从其解释力上说，继承和发扬了牛顿物理学的立场，即科学是普适的，同样的科学规律无论在什么地方都是适用的这是科学形而上学研究的内容，其先声可以追溯到以笛卡尔、莱布尼茨、斯宾诺莎为代表的唯理论学者和以休谟为代表的经验论学者的讨论。

这里我们不进行展开，只举一个小小的例子来说明这种普适性的讨论本质，刘慈欣的《三体1：地球往事》中提到了物理学不存在，用到了一个台球的例子，来自阿西莫夫的名篇《台球》，如果在不同的时间地点两个台球（物理学上两个质点）以同样的初速度发生碰撞，如果其碰撞结果是可预测的，每次都一样，说明物理学定律是普适的（在牛顿世界观中意味着拉普拉斯妖，这是唯理论学者的观点：第一原则应该是绝对确定和无可怀疑的，从第一原则出发的推理应该是绝对确定和无可怀疑的），如果其碰撞结果是不可预测的，同样的初速度其结果居然是随机的（这是经验论学者的观点，特别是休谟直接否认了因果性）。

随着哲学的发展，经过了逻辑经验主义的辩论，到今天变成了新休谟主义与新亚里士多德主义之间的分歧，即倾向性质与直陈性质的区分问题，但这并不是我们今天面临和讨论的主要问题Modern science is sociologically speaking, and sociologist of science Robert King Merton summarizes the ethos of the scientific community: universality, communality

, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. It is the first three that are relevant to this paper. Universalism, the philosophical essence of which has already been described above, and the need for scientific communities to exchange results in order to constantly promote each other, as Leibniz put it: to light one light with another, in terms of the social establishment, involves the second characteristic, communality. Publicity means that scientific results should be made public and not monopolized, because scientific research is cumulative, drawing on the results of predecessors, and if the results are not made public, they cannot be

exchanged, and from this point of view science has no borders. The problem is that the vast majority of scientific knowledge is not just a purely intellectual product. In todays society, corporate innovation dominates the market, so should we require all R&D

departments to publicize all their scientific research results, which is not in line with the law of the market?This also brings us to the third non-self-interestedness, which requires scientists not only to share the results of their research disinterestedly, but also to engage in scientific research for purely disinterested purposes, as Pasteur said earlier, "science is neutral". But this is not reliable, here not more from the science of whether the value of the theoretical discussion of the non-involvement, only to cite a few examples to illustrate. For example, today it is generally recognized that scientists are no more than a profession, and that their discovery and dissemination of knowledge is akin to the transshipment of money in the financial world, and ethical surveys of scientists have not found any significant difference between their level of morality and that of other professions; and

as mentioned above, the latest version of the Hippocratic Oath adds the question of the healthcare workers own concerns: "I shall attend to my own health, well-being, and ability to provide the highest standards of health, well-being, and ability to provide the highest standards of health, well-being and well-being. I will be

concerned with my own health, well-being and ability to provide the highest standards of care", it is clear that we cannot use

selflessness to criticize healthcare professionals that they should not be concerned with themselves and that they should be selfless in caring for only the patients. Therefore Mertons theory was revised and criticized by scholars,

including the Merton School itself, as soon as it was published. Obviously, since the universality, publicity, and selflessness of scientific research are all questionable, it is natural that at some point scientific research

and scientists have their own positions, and the state or nation is naturally one of those positions. It is natural that scientists have their motherland, and it is from this aspect that they elaborate.

近现代科学从社会学上说，科学社会学家默顿（Robert King Merton）对科学共同体的精神气质进行归纳：普遍性、公有性、无私利性和有组织的怀疑与本文相关的是前三者其中普遍性上文已述其哲学本质，从社会建制角度而言，科学共同体需要交流成果，以不断互相促进，如莱布尼茨所言：以一盏明灯点亮另一盏明灯，即涉及到第二个特性公有性。

公有性是说科学成果应该公开，而不应该被独占，因为科学研究是积累似的，要借助前人的成果，如果成果不公开则无法进行交流，从这个角度而言科学无国界问题在于，绝大多数科学知识并不只是单纯的智力产物，当今社会企业创新占据市场主导地位，我们难倒应该要求所有R&D部门公开他们的所有科研成果吗，这是不符合市场规律的。

这也就涉及到第三条无私利性，这种无私利性不仅要求科学家研究结果无私共享更要求他们从事科学研究的目的是单纯无私的，正如前文巴斯德说的“科学是中立的”但这也并不可靠，这里不过多从科学是否价值无涉进行理论探讨，只举几个例子说明。

如今天大家普遍认可科学家不过是一种职业，他们对知识的发现、传播正如金融界对金钱的转运，针对科学家的伦理学调查并没有发现他们的道德水平和其他职业有显著差异；又如前述最新版《希波克拉底誓言》增加了对医护人员自身的关注问题：“我将关注自身健康、幸福与能力，提供最高标准的照护服务”，显然我们无法用无私利性去苛责医护人员不应该关注自己，应该大公无私的只照顾病人。

因此默顿的理论一经发表就受到包括默顿学派自身学者的修正和批评显然，既然科学研究的普遍性、公有性、无私利性都值得怀疑的话，自然某些时候科学研究和科学家就有其立场，国家或民族自然就是其中一种立场科学家有其祖国，自然是从这方面进行阐述的。

Of course, the distinction between science and technology needs to be pointed out here. Normally we would think that technology is ontologically localized, unlike science, which is universal (if one adopts the view of most scientists without a philosophical discernment of science). A technology may have different effects depending on the people, the environment, and the culture in which it is used; for example, it is hard to imagine that people inland would be as motivated to study boats as people on the coast, or to promote online shopping and online courses where there is no Internet. In this sense technology has boundaries (not necessarily national boundaries) and its scope of application.

当然，这里需要指出，科学和技术的区别通常我们会认为，技术从本体论而言就是局域性的，而不像科学是普适性的（如果采用大多数科学家的观点而不进行科学哲学的辨析的话）一门技术可能因为使用人群、环境、文化不同而产生不同的效果，比如我们很难想象内陆的人会像沿海的人一样有足够的动力去研究船只，也很难想象在没有互联网的地方去推广网络购物和线上课程。

从这个角度而言技术是有界限的（不一定是国家界限）和其适用范围的Therefore, we can conclude that technology has boundaries, while "science has no borders and scientists have their home countries" is not a contradiction, but only discusses the attributes and nature of science from different aspects. Today we would also use science without borders to appeal to the fact that different people, regardless of nationality, age, gender, race, etc., should not face a threshold to enter science. The New York Academy of

Sciences (NYAS) launched the Scientists Without Borders program under the guidance of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to help developing countries develop science, and Dave Webbs SGR is the UK version of the Scientists Without Borders program. Especially in the context of the rise of the feminist movement in recent years, the question of whether or not women, people in poverty-stricken areas, and people in underdeveloped countries have

equal rights to education is a question worth asking.Clara, whom we mentioned earlier, was in fact the first woman to obtain a doctorate in chemistry in Germany, but did not become a professional chemist after marrying Haber, just as Mileva Marić did not become a professional physicist after marrying Albert Einstein [12], and in this sense science is again far from being borderless.

因此我们可以下一个结论说，技术是有界限的，而“科学无国界，科学家有其祖国”并不矛盾，只是从不同方面讨论了科学的属性和本质今天我们也会用科学无国界来呼吁不同的人，无论国籍、年龄、性别、种族等等，都不应该面临进入科学的门槛。

纽约科学院（NYAS）在联合国千年发展目标的指导下发起了科学家无国界计划（Scientists Without Borders），以帮助发展中国家发展科学，戴夫·韦伯所在的SGR就是英国版的科学家无国界计划。

尤其是在近年来女性主义运动兴起背景下，对于女性、贫困地区人群、不发达国家的人而言，是否拥有平等的受教育权利本身就是一个值得追问的问题我们前面提到的克拉拉其实是第一位在德国取得化学博士学位的女性，但嫁给哈伯之后并没有成为职业化学家，正如米列娃·玛丽克（Mileva Marić）嫁给爱因斯坦之后并没有成为职业物理学家一样[12]，从这个角度而言，科学又还远谈不上没有国界。

The emphasis of this expression has varied on different occasions. For China, since the 1950s and 1960s, when foreign students were called to return to China, the national attributes and national righteousness of scientists have been emphasized, and Qian Xuesen, Qian Sanqiang, Guo Yonghuai and others returned to China against this background to develop Chinas own science and technology on their own. When we go to their memoirs, that generation more or less mentions this, for example, Ge Tingsui directly used this phrase as a title

when he commemorated Qian Xuesen and Wu Youxun, not to mention the fact that to this day, Chinas scientific development has quite a deep relationship with the political state.For the Western countries, because since Columbus great age of navigation, the Western world (also including the later United States) belongs to a period of foreign expansion, forming the so-called Western centrism or Eurocentrism, they exported their own science and technology to the outside world at the same time unconsciously and the values, such as the missionaries of the late Ming and early Qing dynasties, in order to attract the Chinese to believe in religion and the spread of science and technology. However, their political color is hidden, such as the previous Penfield actually focuses on Canada-U.S. relations

, and as in Science Without Borders: Harry Kelly and the Reconstruction of Science and Technology in Post-War Japan by Hideo Yoshikawa and Kauffman , a book about the U.S. for the reconstruction of science and technology in post-war Japan, which also highlights the U.S.s disinterestedness, as Penfield suggests Harry Kelly acted as a diplomatic ambassador.

在不同的场合，这一表达的侧重点也不同对于中国而言，自20世纪五六十年代号召留学生回国起，就一直在强调科学家的国家属性和民族大义，钱学森、钱三强、郭永怀等人都是在这样的背景下回国，自力更生发展中国自己的科学技术的。

我们去看他们的回忆录，那一代人多少都会提到这一点，例如葛庭燧在纪念钱学森和吴有训时就直接使用了这句话作为标题[13]，更不用说至今中国的科学发展和政治国家关系颇深对于西方国家而言，由于自哥伦布大航海时代以来，西方世界（也包括后来的美国）都属于一个对外扩张的时期，形成了所谓的西方中心论或欧洲中心论，他们对外输出自己的科学技术的同时也在不自觉地和价值观，如明末清初的传教士，为了吸引中国人信教而进行科学技术的传播。

但其政治色彩是隐藏的，如前面彭菲尔德其实侧重于加美关系，又如吉川秀生（Hideo Yoshikawa，音译）和考夫曼（Kauffman）撰写的《科学无国界：哈利·凯利和战后日本科学技术的重建》，这本关于美国对于日本战后科学技术重建的书也突出了美国在其中的无私利性，正如彭菲尔德所言哈利·凯利起到了外交大使的作用。

As a result, international relations (diplomacy) and science and technology have long been one of the research hotspots. We also conclude this article with a recent case study, the Institute for Democracy & Economic Analysis (IDEA) conducted a study on globalized science in 2019 [15], which, by combining data from 174 countries, 27 disciplines, and 13 years of data, shows how Chinese science has entered the global research arena and how

the so-called "Iron Curtain" has had a lasting impact on research in certain countries. By combining data from 174 countries and 27 disciplines over a 13-year period, it shows how Chinese science has entered the global research arena and how the so-called "Iron Curtain" has had a lasting impact on research in certain countries. The paper quantifies the globalization of science as the extent to which researchers from specific countries and disciplines publish in journals, with globalized journals receiving

contributions from their peers around the world; the less globalized the researchers, the more they publish in local journals, which are authored by researchers from a small number of countries (or even just one country).Its main conclusions are the following. (1) Regardless of discipline, science in developed countries has traditionally been highly globalized. (2) A country like China has profoundly globalized its scientific system, gradually moving from the lowest rate of globalization to the world stage, including in the social

sciences. (3) Countries like the Czech Republic have integrated the physical and life sciences into the global arena, while the social sciences are in the process of slow globalization. (4) Science knows no borders, and the low level of globalization of national science is a sign of system failure and inefficiency.Especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Soviet countries, including Russia, tended to

publish in local Russian-language journals rather than globalized ones, which seriously hampered the development of Russian science. It is as if they were enveloped in a Dyson sphere and no one else was paying attention to them anymore, which is not uninspiring for scientific cooperation in the current epidemic and international

situation.Especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Soviet countries, including Russia, tended to publish in local Russian-language journals rather than globalized ones, which seriously hampered the development of Russian science. It is as if they were enveloped in a Dyson sphere and no one else was paying attention to them anymore, which is not uninspiring for scientific cooperation in the current epidemic and international situation.

因此，国际关系（外交）和科学技术早已经成为了研究热点之一我们也以最近一个案例作为文章的结尾，民主和经济分析研究所（Institute for Democracy & Economic Analysis ，IDEA）2019年进行了一项全球化科学的研究[15]，通过结合来自174个国家、27个学科和13年的数据，展示了中国科学如何进入全球研究领域以及所谓的“铁幕”对某些国家研究产生的持久影响。

论文将科学的全球化量化为来自特定国家和学科的研究人员在期刊上发表论文的程度，全球化刊物得到了世界各地同行的贡献；全球化程度越低，研究人员在本地期刊上发表的论文就越多，本地期刊是由少数国家（甚至只有一个国家）的研究人员撰写的。

其主要结论是如下（1）不论学科如何，发达国家的科学传统上都是高度全球化的（2）中国这样的国家已经深刻地实现了其科学体系的全球化，从最低的全球化率逐步走向世界舞台，包括社会科学领域（3）捷克这样的国家物理科学和生命科学已融入全球舞台，而社会科学却在缓慢的全球化过程中。

（4）科学无国界，国家科学的全球化程度低是系统失败和效率低下的征兆特别是苏联解体之后，包括俄罗斯在内的原苏联国家都倾向于在本地俄语期刊上发表论文，而不是全球化的期刊上，这严重阻碍了俄罗斯科学发展仿佛它们被一个戴森球笼罩着，其他人都不再关注他们，这对于当前疫情和国际情势下的科学合作不无启发。

免责声明：本站所有信息均搜集自互联网，并不代表本站观点，本站不对其真实合法性负责。如有信息侵犯了您的权益，请告知，本站将立刻处理。联系QQ：1640731186