The whole network has been opened to protect rights and carry plagiarism reports
During the new crown epidemic, Zhang Mou, president of Southern Medical University, and Professor Yu Li had a heated discussion on the treatment of the virus. The two have very different philosophies, and President Zhang adheres to the principle of rigorous scientific verification and is cautious about any unproven treatment options; Professor Yu, on the other hand, advocates that various treatments must be actively tried and not limited to traditional scientific verification models.
Academia should be inclusive
Different points of view collided, but this time the two sides held their own opinions, and the debate intensified, and I am afraid that to some extent, they have formed a bond. This also laid the groundwork for future punishment decisions. After the incident, Southern Medical University resolutely punished Professor Yu Li and refused to change. This decision was seen by the outside world as too harsh and incompatible with public expectations.
The reason for this is related to the differences in the two people's ideas in the past, but it does not seem to have evolved into such serious consequences. On closer examination, this incident may have involved differences in the scholarly views of history between the two men. President Zhang may be conservative, emphasizing the observance of scientific laws and rigor; Professor Yu, on the other hand, may be an enterprising group of people who advocate an open-minded approach to new things.
This philosophical divergence has been further highlighted during this extraordinary period of the new crown epidemic, and it is inevitable that disputes between the two sides will arise over the specific treatment of the virus. However, the school severely punished Professor Yu for this, and I am afraid that there are more internal factors worth exploring. President Zhang and Professor Yu each have a certain influence in the academic community.
Principal Zhang may be similar to some official factions; Professor Yu is a more independent group of scholars in the academic community. Against the backdrop of the government's tightened control over public opinion, Professor Yu's remarks may have touched some sensitive nerves, and thus attracted punishment. This, in turn, exacerbated the contradictions and antagonism between the academic factions and further pushed up the political temperature of the incident.
Otherwise, the academic differences between the two would not have evolved into such a violent confrontation. Whatever the reason, the resolute punishment of Professor Yu by Southern Medical University is seen by the outside world as too harsh, inconsistent with the facts, and will seriously damage the reputation of the university.
It is important that the relevant authorities step in to conduct an impartial investigation, not to silence dissenting voices, but to preserve the space for public opinion expression and ensure academic freedom. Principal Zhang should also show metrics, keep pace with the times, repair the relationship between professors, and maintain the unity of the school. We hope that the University will listen to the voices of all parties, show an open-minded mind, respond to social concerns with the greatest sincerity, eliminate misunderstandings, and maintain the positive image of Southern Medical University.
Only in this way can this controversy come to an early end and rebuild the atmosphere of rational discussion in the academic circles. In the final analysis, we should look at this incident rationally, reflect on the communication and collaboration mechanisms within the academic community, and adhere to an open and inclusive academic attitude. When there is a difference of academic viewpoint, we should discuss rationally in the spirit of seeking common ground while reserving differences, rather than intensifying contradictions.
Academics should provide channels for different views to be expressed and prevent factional fighting. Relevant departments should also take a fair stance and maintain the space for public opinion. Scholars should uphold academic integrity, maintain independent judgment, and not allow personal bias or external interference to affect academic judgment. Only in this way can the academic community provide intellectual support for the progress of society and work together to address various challenges.
It is hoped that the president of Southern Medical University can show his mind, communicate rationally, and eliminate the negative impact of this controversy as soon as possible. Let's work together to uphold academic rationality and support academic independence!