Fang Zhouzi: Morality in my Heart, Science in my Mind

The following is a translation of an essay by Fang Zhouzi. The essay was originally composed about two years ago. In light of the recent attack, Fang Zhouzi decided to revise and publish it in the September 1's issue of China Youth Daily. You can read the original Chinese version here.

Morality in my Heart, Science in my Mind

Fang Zhouzi

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant ended his Critique of Practical Reason with a famous quote that was later carved into his tombstone: "Two things fill the mind with ever-increasing wonder and awe, the more often and the more intensely the mind of thought is drawn to them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me."

But the ability of an individual mind is extremely limited, even the intellectual giants are no exception. At the time of Kant, such inquiry often produced even bigger confusion and eventually led to the belief in some kind of mysterious, supernatural force which could be used to conclude the thinking once and for all. Because he could not resolve the issue of "First Cause" in planetary motion, Issac Newton reserved a spot for God there. Although Kant did not allow God to move the planets, he nevertheless believed that the existence of moral laws proved the existence of God, regarding God as the personification of all things kind.

Of course all such arguments have now run their course. Modern science has been discovering nature's secrets, in which there is no place for God. Science is still unable to answer many questions. And because of the limitation in human cognitive ability, it is impossible to answer all questions. But science is indeed the most reliable method of inquiry that is known to man. If science cannot provide an answer, there is no reason to believe that a reliable answer could be obtained through any other means. Leaving unknown or unsolvable issues to God and immortal is nothing but laziness. Yet morality and justice has always been present in the history written with blood. It is the crystallization of the long struggle by numerous lofty and courageous people. It originates from the necessity of human survival, happiness, and progress, and therefore no need for the assumption of God. If there were indeed an almighty God, the world would not see so much evil. But it is also because the presence of so much evil, morality and justice is so valuable.

Under the starry heavens, the human body is miniscule; yet science enables us to reach every corner of the universe. In the course of history, the human life is short; yet morality and justice can allow our spirit melting into the historical process and achieve longevity. As long as there is morality in our hearts and science in our minds, we will not lose our ways or waste our time within our short lifespan. Morality is the starlight shining from the edge of the heaven, science is the flashlight that leads our way. Morality and justice gives us ideals and passion; science bestows us with rationality and the appreciation in the importance of evidence. "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." This quote of Albert Einstein has been misinterpreted by numerous people who are not aware of its context, mistaking it as Einstein's support for traditional religion. But the "religion" referred to by Einstein here is not of its common meaning, but a passion and determination in pursuing truth. We could revise this famous quote to become: Science without morality is lame. Morality without science is blind. If there is neither science nor morality, we would all become the living dead.

It is from such a belief that I have remained deeply interested in both science and humanity since my middle school years. This is evident from the pen name I have been using. In ancient times, two boats sailing in parallel is called a "FangZhou", and "FangZhouzi" is a person who stands astride on two boats at the same time. "It's such a joy to sail two boats like one." My dream is therefore to sail the dual boats of science and humanity simultaneously and taste the happiness of all the intellectual and lofty people ancient and today, home and abroad. When I was working in scientific research, I spent all my spare time studying and writing about literature and history. After I left my scientific research career, my writings then mainly concentrated on science. In the last decade or so, I became famous by exposing scientific fraud and corruption, so much so that many people mistakenly thought I couldn't or shouldn't do anything other than writing to debunk fraud. Actually, the socalled debunking is only an impulse of mine from witnessing injustice. It is not my main interest. Yet to me, such injustice is a betrayal of science and morality. When necessary, I am willing to defend my belief, even if I must pay the price of blood. But in other ordinary times, I would much rather pass on my belief, hope to propagate science and morality deeper and longer.

Nobody could become the personification of science and morality. But every person can become the defender and propagator of science and morality, as long as you are willing and possess ability and courage.

My dear readers, in these dark days, let us look up to the starlight of morality, ignite the lights of science, hold our hands and march on together, and persevere.

Science: Assailants Attack China's Science Watchdog

Science magazine reports in its ScienceInsider:

China's self-appointed science fraud buster was assaulted yesterday afternoon in Beijing. Fang Shimin, better known by his pen name Fang Zhouzi, has used his Web site New Threads and his microblog to expose scientific misconduct, debunk crackpot medicine and pseudoscience claims, and catch cheaters who falsify resumes with fake degrees and nonexistent publications.

Fang has been slammed with libel suits contesting his often-acerbic exposes. But yesterday's attack--if it was linked to his antifraud crusade--takes things to a new level...

Among the many supportive comments left under the article on the web site is this one from Professor Zachary Burton, Fang Zhouzi's Ph. D. advisor:

Fang Shimin received his Ph. D. under my direction at Michigan State University. I am deeply troubled and saddened by this attack on Shimin. I wish him a rapid recovery from his injuries and a return to his work.

Meanwhile, the Christian Science Monitor also published a report titled "Attack on China whistleblower shows risk of unveiling corruption, fraud".

Fang Zhouzi Attacked near his Residence in Beijing

The shocking news first came in the form of an entry on a Chinese micro-blogging site: "I am the wife of Fang Zhouzi, I am publishing this for him. Just now, Fang Zhouzi was attacked by two hooligans with pepper spray and hammer near our home in Beijing. He suffered minor injuries." Fang Zhouzi's wife further appealed for police to launch a speedy investigation.

The twitter-like message immediately spread all over Chinese web site with thousands of netters relaying and rebroadcasting it. Many expressed shock and sympathy. At least one official radio media in China has picked up the story.

Later, Fang Zhouzi wrote his own recollection of the event:

At 3pm of August 29, I met with two reporters from the Liaoning Satellite TV near my residence in Beijing and we went into a tea house nearby to do an interview. It was the same tea house which had been described in detail by the Chinese Entrepreneurs magazine [edit: during a previous interview]. The interview completed at around 5pm. I saw the two reporters off by a taxi. Just as I turned around and walked a couple of steps, a man suddenly came to my face and sprayed some misty material. It had acute smell, I felt dizzy and weakness in my legs and almost fainted. I immediately held my breath and ran across street. Another man came chasing me from behind with a hammer aimed at my head. I ran as fast I could, the man could not chase up to me. He then threw the hammer at me twice. The first time he was aiming at my head, it missed. I heard the sound of hammer falling into the ground and looked back. He picked up the hammer and threw it at me again. This time it hit on my waist area and blood came out there. I ran a couple of hundred meters and the guy stopped chasing. I called for emergency as soon as I reached our subdivision. Police came very fast and went about to look for eye witnesses. After interviewing with police, I went to a hospital nearby for an exam. Except for a couple of scratches near my waist, my body appeared to be fine.

I first thought the misty substance used by the hooligan was pepper spray. But after discussing with medical expert, new I think it is a kind of anesthesia with ether in it. I had used ether in labs before and it smelled similar. Their plan was to have one guy make me faint and another murder me with the hammer. Maybe they had learned the lesson from a previous failed attack to reporter Fang Xuanchang. It was fortunate that I reacted quickly, ran fast, and got away.

I have no personal enemies. This is obviously an attempt of someone who was exposed by me seeking revenge. They had scouted the area near my residence and waited for long and finally got this opportunity to attack. I could not speculate who was behind this. I have given the police all the hints I am aware of. This case is now being handled by the Shijingshang police station. The head of the station has called several times and appear to be diligent on the case. I hope they could find the attacker soon, as well as those who attacked Fang Xuanchang.

Beaumont Hospital's Result of Xiao Procedure Questioned in Journal of Urology

The Beaumont Hospital in Michigan is one of the first American institutes that took up clinical trials of the controversial Xiao Procedure. We have previously reported on their misleading propaganda. More recently, the hospital has also become the first institute to publish clinical results of Xiao Procedure in an established scientific journal. Dr. Ken Peters and his coauthors wrote in Journal of Urology of their results:

At 1 year 7 patients (78%) had a reproducible increase in bladder pressure with stimulation of the dermatome. Two patients were able to stop catheterization and all safely stopped antimuscarinics. No patient achieved complete urinary continence. The majority of subjects reported improved bowel function. One patient was continent of stool at baseline and 4 were continent at 1 year. Of the patients 89% had variable weakness of lower extremity muscle group at 1 month. One child had persistent foot drop and the remainder returned to baseline by 12 months.

In their conclusion, they noted that "more patients and longer followup are needed to assess the risk/benefit ratio of this novel procedure."

The Journal, however, appears to be less than impressed. It published two pieces of editorial comments to accompany the paper, both are quite negative. In one, Dr. Eric Kurzrock of UC Davis Children's Hospital wrote:

The authors present the first North American experience with lumbar to sacral nerve rerouting for patients with spina bifida. The results from this study and previous animal and clinical studies by Xiao clearly demonstrate that nerve rerouting produces a somatic-autonomic or cutaneous/bladder reflex with stimulation of the lower extremity dermatome. What is also clear is that the clinical benefit of the procedure is not at all similar to previous reports.

Although the authors did an excellent job of following the patients and characterizing their changes, the results are hard to validate without a control population going through the same rigorous surveillance regimen. In particular the improved bowel continence and minimal changes in bladder compliance may not be statistically significant. The fact that most patients were still on clean intermittent catheterization and none achieved complete urinary continence is troubling in light of the report of 87% success with 110 children with spina bifida presented by Xiao. One has to wonder if most of these children are not voiding volitionally or using the newly developed cutaneous reflex, and how much reinnervation has a role in this surgery. Is it possible that unilateral denervation of the S3 ventral motor nerve produced improved compliance and continence, as previously reported in numerous clinical series?

I congratulate the authors for taking on this challenge. I hope this study leads to a rebirth or refocus regarding neurosurgical treatments of neuropathic bowel and bladder. I strongly agree with the authors that this procedure should remain on a research protocol only.

In another, Dr. John Park of University of Michigan was even more blunt:

One of the most curious findings is the discrepancy between urodynamic data and subjective voiding. One patient exhibited a decrease in capacity and an absence of reflex arc, and yet he subjectively reported improved bladder and bowel function! I could not help but speculate that his voiding after the procedure could simply be the bladder emptying via intra-abdominal pressure generation against an open bladder neck, given his preoperative stress incontinence. Xiao reported that more than 87% of 110 patients gained sensation and continence within 1 year (reference 7 in article). In comparison, the current patients undergoing the identical procedure with the help of Xiao himself only showed a modest improvement in objective urodynamic studies and subjective reporting. Unless the innovators provide a sound argument and data for the validity of the procedure, there is a great danger of its improper and rapid adaptation by patients and the medical community at large.

USA Today: Plagiarism Shuts Down US School in China

USA Today reported today that a "plagiarism epidemic" has forced Centenary College to discontinue an MBA program in China. According to the paper:

"The college is extremely concerned with the welfare of the Chinese students involved in the program, but must note that its review revealed evidence of widespread plagiarism among other issues, at a level that ordinarily would have resulted in students' immediate dismissal from the college," Debra Albanese, Centenary's vice president for strategic advancement, said in a statement. "Despite that, in an effort to afford students every fair possibility, the college has opted to attempt to reach an amicable solution, in lieu of any such dismissal. The students were offered a choice to receive a tuition refund in exchange for a standard release in higher education or take a comprehensive exam in order to earn a degree."

It went on to say that all but two of about 400 students have accepted a refund.

A "Success" that Could be Easily Replicated

Followers of this blog are well aware that Fang Zhouzi has been a lonely crusader in exposing scientific fraud and misconduct for over a decade. Although there had been a few cases that gained wide publicity, much of his efforts remain unknown to the general public. It is therefore somewhat ironic that it was when he occasionally wandered out of the ivory tower settings that he achieved an usually fame.

It all started with an innocent comment on the Chinese-version of twitters. When answering a question from a follower, Fang Zhouzi casually mentioned that he had been aware that the diplomatic credentials of a famous individual are most likely faked. All of a sudden, the Chinese twitter world exploded and the "news" flooded into traditional news media. In a matter of days, it became the top news in China.

The famous individual in question is Tang Jun (唐骏), a purported self-motivator who had achieved huge success in business world through his own unrelenting efforts. Tang Jun boasts an enviable resume, including the chief executive in China for Microsoft and several successful startups. Several books about his story, including a couple of his autobiography, are best sellers and he is a well-sort motivational speaker in universities and colleges. Indeed, Tang Jun is an idol for China's youth. One of his autobiographies is titled as My Success Can Be Replicated.

In various versions of his books and speeches, Tang Jun describes his experience as having earned a bachelor degree in China, a master in Japan, and a Ph.D. in USA, all while producing several inventions and starting up a few companies.

It was that Ph.D. degree in USA that caught Fang Zhouzi's eyes first. More than a year ago, in fact, Fang Zhouzi had already pointed out that Tang Jun's story could not be consistent with facts. In his online resume, Tang Jun claimed that he left Japan to pursue research in the famed California Institute of Technology (Cal Tech) and then "earned a Ph.D. degree." Fang Zhouzi searched the Cal Tech database and could not find any record of Tang Jun, either as a degree recipient or an author of any published research work. Fang Zhouzi concluded that Tang Jun had lied about his degree.

After the Chinese twitter storm, Tang Jun went through several phases in his defense. He first accused Fang Zhouzi as having ulterior motives and unworthy of responding. Then he claimed that he has been misquoted in his own autobiography and that he had never implied that his Ph.D. was from Cal Tech. Finally, as most who had been exposed by Fang Zhouzi, Tang Jun threatened to sue in courts.

The story quickly takes another turn. After "clarifying" that his degree was not from CalTech, Tang Jun produced a certificate indicating that he indeed has a Ph.D. degree and it was from Pacific Western University in California.

Pacific Western University, Fang Zhouzi quickly pointed out, is a well-known "diploma mill" in the US that has been the target of various governmental and consumer complains. Such a degree certificate could be readily obtained for a fee of over $2,000 USD. Furthermore, Fang Zhouzi and his supporters provided evidence that Tang Jun's claim on his inventions and other achievements are likely to be baseless. "80% of his autobiography could be made-up," Fang Zhouzi told a newspaper.

Tang Jun insists that his degree is genuine. But he has since toned down his public defense and threats. Meanwhile, the story continues to spread, with more and more Pacific Western University degree holders are discovered, some of them occupy prominent positions in business as well as academic worlds in China. There appears to be already a flurry of activities in revising online resumes and pages to remove such degrees, while others argue that their PWU degree was earned through studying programs.

The media circus caught Fang Zhouzi himself by surprise. He hopes that he could soon return to his beloved work of writing scientific essays and paying attention more in academia rather than business world.

Foreign Policy: Who Tried to Kill Fang Xuanchang?

The following is a dispatch by Foreign Policy on July 6, 2010:

Who Tried to Kill Fang Xuanchang?
A chilling attack on a controversial science journalist in Beijing bodes poorly for scientific progress.

BY SAM GEALL | JULY 6, 2010

On the evening of June 24, Fang Xuanchang, a 37-year-old science and technology editor at China's Caijing magazine, finished work around 10 p.m. and began his walk home. Half an hour later he was nearing his apartment by Beijing's third ring road when he felt a sudden blow to his back. Fang turned to see two large men behind him brandishing steel bars.

Fang tried to run away and then shield himself as the men, ignoring his attempts to communicate with them, struck him repeatedly across his back and head. Brawny and adept in martial arts, Fang not only remained conscious, but also managed to fight back. Finally, as Fang stumbled toward a taxi, his clothes soaked in blood, the attackers left the scene.

Later that night at Beijing's Navy General Hospital, doctors sutured a 2-inch gash on the back of his head. His assailants behaved like professionals, carrying out the brutal ambush in about four minutes and showing little concern about passersby witnessing the attack. "Their goal was clear," Fang told me in a June 30 email. "It was to kill me on the spot, or stop me from reaching the hospital in time so that I would bleed to death."

Why would someone try to kill Fang Xuanchang? No one knows, or even seems to care. The attackers remain at large, despite an ongoing police investigation and Caijing's best efforts to cooperate with the police and involve the All-China Journalists Association. The attack was covered in brief in Beijing-based newspapers, including a brief editorial in a state-run newspaper arguing that journalists shouldn't be attacked. But no one in the Chinese media has gotten into the question of who would attack Fang -- and more importantly, why exactly Fang might have been attacked.

For Fang's colleagues, however, the message is clear: Reporting on controversial topics, as Fang has done, is unsafe. Journalists who are abused don't necessarily find out who has attacked them or why, but the message sent to their friends and colleagues is clear: Don't go there, or you could be next. It has a chilling effect on a wide circle of people. In the case of science journalism, the financial and political stakes are increasingly high, and the personal risks might be increasingly high as well.

Fang is one of the leading figures among China's scientific muckrakers -- a scourge of academic and government-sponsored pseudoscience and a critic of public and private quackery. For more than 10 years as a journalist, editor, and blogger on the influential (although frequently blocked) Chinese watchdog website New Threads, Fang has taken on academics listing faked awards and publishing plagiarized papers; hawkers of herbal cancer "cures," such as Wang Zhenguo, peddler of the Tian Xian herbal cancer treatment; and Chinese scientists who claim to predict earthquakes, among other targets. But paranoia and anger, even violence, mark some recent responses to Fang's work.

Several weeks ago Fang, previously science editor at China Newsweek (unrelated to the U.S. magazine Newsweek), appeared alongside a fellow rationalist, the biochemist-turned-columnist Fang Shimin (no relation, better known by his pen name Fang Zhouzi), on a Shenzhen TV debate about earthquake forecasting -- a largely discredited practice that remains an article of faith for many Chinese scientists and officials. One speaker, an official from China's national earthquake administration, a significant bureau under the State Council, spoke positively about parrots that can predict temblors and the paranormal abilities of a man who claimed he heard ringing in his ears before the quake in Yushu, in northwest China, in April. One guest on the show, Ren Zhenqiu of the Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, accused the science activists of accepting U.S. money to stifle Chinese innovation. Fang Shimin claimed on his blog that after the recording, Ren Zhenqiu called him a "big Chinese traitor" and threw a punch at him.

And this is not the full extent of the threats against Fang Shimin. On July 2, Fang said on his Sina microblog that he had received a threatening phone call. "Be careful in the next few days," the voice said. "Someone is going to fix you."

Scientific ideas have a complex life in China. Today an important government slogan is the "scientific view of development," yet academic fraud is widespread. In January, the scientific journal Acta Crystallographica Section E, a peer-reviewed international journal based in Britain, announced the wholesale retraction of more than 70 papers by Chinese scientists who had falsified data. Three months later, the same publication announced the removal of another 39 articles "as a result of problems with the data sets or incorrect atom assignments." According to New Threads, 37 of these were entirely produced at Chinese universities. One Chinese-government study cited by Nature found that about one-third of more than 6,000 scientists surveyed at six top Chinese institutions said they had practiced "plagiarism, falsification or fabrication."

Critics have blamed the pressure to produce fraudulent papers on unrealistic publication targets set by bureaucrats. But for Fang Xuanchang, the problem goes deeper still, as he told me when we met in May. It represents a slide backward from the scientific spirit of the anti-imperialist May 4th Movement -- the early 20th-century uprising that championed democracy, critical thought, and innovation. Speaking after the attack, Fang described himself and his colleagues as "quixotic." "Not many people understand the work we are doing," he said. "Most Chinese people's attitudes to science are superstitious and fearful." Things might be even worse at the elite level, he said, where science is encouraged in the abstract, without a grasp of the scientific method. Regarding scientific and critical thinking, Fang added, "Chinese people need a new enlightenment."

Such issues are not only of parochial concern: Renewing China's oft-cited historical reputation for scientific innovation is a matter of urgency for the world. Last month a report from Britain's National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts suggested that as China enters a new phase of economic and geopolitical might, the country's potential to roll out new, low-carbon technologies becomes an increasingly important factor in global efforts to address climate change.

Harnessing scientific prowess requires promoting good academic practice, scientific education, critical thinking -- and science journalism.