A lecture of Dr. Jan Campbell at the China Center for Contemporary World Studies – Panel II
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, and friends!
Let me thank the organizers of this timely venue in a location I first learned about nearly 40 years ago, in which one of my students began his career, and which I visited some 5 years ago. Allow me to address you at the crossroads of known, less known, and even unknown developments in many countries in a variety of civilizations.
For reasons of time restrictions, I would concentrate on some of the main theses related to the topic: modernization and science, technology, and innovations.
Understanding of the China Center for Contemporary World Studies
A think tank should be a relatively independent policy research or consultative organization providing original and creative ideas to meet the needs of the country, government, and society. As the research focuses on state strategies, diplomatic policies, and international relations, it certainly should not be driven by profit. Independence is indispensable to the credibility, impartiality, and commonality of a think tank. Without this, the organization is more likely to become a mouthpiece for interest groups.
Those institutes that call themselves think tanks but focus on making profits should therefore be considered unqualified and should not be called think tanks.
According to the Opinions on Intensifying the Building of New Type Think Tanks with Chinese Characteristics issued by the central authorities at the end of January this year, these should be “nonprofit research institutions and consultancies working mainly on strategic issues and public policies to aid the decisions to be made scientifically, democratically, and in conformity with laws by the CPC and the government.”
Own life experience, including that of an analyst, requires knowledge of the history of science and innovation, of the importance of knowledge of philosophy and languages, what is called a pathological science, what are nature-like technologies, the principles of quantum physics, and last but not least, the principles of ecology, efficiency, and the economy of processes in education, research, and production.
Introduction to understanding science and innovation
In general, the history of science covers the development of science from ancient times to the present. It encompasses all three major branches of science: natural, social, and formal. Science’s earliest roots can be traced to Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia around 3000–1200 BCE.
Many historians consider astronomy to be the oldest science. Ibn al-Haytham, who lived a thousand years ago, is finally being recognized as the world’s first true scientist. Galileo Galilei has been called the Father of Science.
As far as the history of ancient Chinese scientists and engineers is concerned, we have to accept that Chinese scientists and engineers made significant scientific innovations, findings, and technological advances across various scientific disciplines, including the natural sciences, engineering, medicine, military technology, mathematics, geology, and astronomy.
Among the earliest inventions were the binary code, one of the earliest examples of genetic sequencing, the abacus, the sundial, and the Kongming lantern. The Four Great Inventions—the compass, gunpowder, papermaking, and printing—were among the most important technological advances, only known to Europe by the end of the Middle Ages 1,000 years later. As far as I know, the Tang dynasty (618–906) in particular was a time of great innovation. A good deal of exchange occurred between Western and Chinese discoveries up until the Qing dynasty.
The Jesuit China missions of the 16th and 17th centuries introduced Western science and astronomy. at the same time, bringing Chinese knowledge of technology back to Europe. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the introduction of Western technology was a major factor in the modernization of China. Much of the early Western works in the history of science in China was done by Joseph Needham and his Chinese partner, Lu Gwei-djen.
For today’s address, I would consider that a man combines elements of two beings in himself. Through his soul, the structure of the spiritual world, he can not only see the internal structure of the universe, the links that connect all realities, but also cognize and see the world in its interconnection.
In the context of the above, the boundary between truth and falsehood, between brightness and non-falsehood, is always easy and dangerous to cross. In life, as in Dostoevsky’s Besakh, it is more difficult to live, not to lie, and not to believe one’s own lies. Or in Crime and Punishment: Everything depends on what environment and in what environment a person is. Everything depends on the environment, and man himself is nothing.
If we speak of modernization, we should remember that it is a Western direction of development and not a Russian or Eastern direction. The West has so far been victorious in spreading the concept of modernization (modernity) and its mutations. Fromm and Kozhev have contributed to this temporary victory. For Kozhev, the Revolutionary War and all that came after it were merely a continuation of the revolution criticized, for example, by Tutchev.
In the context of modernization and the above, the merit of Fromm lies in his convincing proof that Marx’s materialism is not an opponent of spiritual values as such, but that the distribution of well-being and the spiritual liberation of man are at the center of Marx’s doctrine. But Fromm did not understand that Marx did not seek spiritual liberation in classical Western culture and philosophy.
The old materialism concentrates on civil society and perceives the individual; the new materialism (of Marx) concentrates on human society in a united community. In the Eleventh Thesis, Marx puts the final nail in the coffin of his critics when he writes on a timely topic: philosophers explain and describe the world in various ways, but they do not say how to change it.
The Eleventh Thesis, like the current challenges and deficits, promotes a coherent view of the world, unified knowledge, and common sense. Marx criticized the position of Oswald Spengler (1880–1936). This German philosopher and writer who dealt with history, art, and politics is known for The Decline of the West (1922), a comparative study of civilizations that called for a conservative revolution. Spengler called the position of criticism Faustian. Germany at that time was disintegrating into atoms. Faust, from the very beginning to the end, takes care of himself. For Faust, society does not exist, and the human race does not exist. He immerses himself in himself and expects to be saved by himself.
Language, psychology, and creativity
The term mother tongue should not be interpreted as the language of one´s other. Language stands for a medium of social interaction specific to each culture that is passed down as a legacy from one generation to another. None of the languages can develop in a vacuum. An abstract language is important to our critical thinking, meaning clear thinking. It represents a challenge for many nationals. Language and critical thinking have three primary purposes: 1) to inform, 2) to persuade, and 3) to explain.
Therefore, languages are powerful tools for how we solve problems. They are not separable from neurolinguistics, neurology, psychology (social and transactional, individual and quantum), brain theories (connection, statistical, and cybernetic), and mental and behavioral programming.
Please note that many individuals speaking English as a second language seem to lack understanding of the words content, metaphors, humor, irony, sarcasm, to name a few, and also relations to old languages, including Sanskrit and Farsi.
Metaphors can serve as a model for creativity on purpose because they can provide a basis for: 1) representation; 2) explanation; and 3) prediction.
Metaphors at the same time serve as models of thinking: 1) thinking is perceiving, giving rise to a representation model; 2) moving gives rise to a search model; and 3) thinking as an object of manipulation gives rise to a restructuring model.
Psychological Inertia
Knowledge of how human psychology functions is essential for those who are involved in creative or innovative processes. Knowing that psychological inertia is a reactionary process related to the appearance of anything threatening, sudden, or new may help when solving complex problems. The process has its analogy in medicine, and it has six basic stages:
Denial-Attack-Anger-Substitution-Compromise-Acceptance
Basic rules for 3E concepts
- Don´t judge, as most of the situations are out of control except for the respect you can pay.
- Formulate questions.
- Use descriptive forms, as the physical world stands for a conflict between believers and non-believers.
- Accept that doing nothing is much better than changing something into nothing.
- We have no soul. We are souls. Therefore, we have only a body.
- The price you pay is a product of your interactions.
- Discover the difference between I cannot and I wish not.
- To become rich or to be rich is an art, and you should know why you want to be rich.
Pathological Science
Irving Langmuir (1881–1957) was born in Brooklyn. After studies in physical chemistry, he spent most of his career in the research laboratories of General Electric. He won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1932. He gave his famous talk at the GE Research Labs on December 18, 1953, four years before his death.
The talk was concerned with what Langmuir called “the science of things that aren’t so,” and in it he gave a colorful account of several examples of a particular kind of pitfall into which scientists may sometimes stumble.
Langmuir never published his investigations into the subject of pathological science. Despite this, he was a key builder of GE and other transnational companies.
A tape recording was made of his speech. However, a microgroove disk transcription that was made from this tape was found among the Langmuir papers in the Library of Congress. This disk recording is of poor quality, but most of what he said can be understood with a little practice, and it constitutes the text of the book Voodoo Science by Robert Parks (Oxford, 2000).
The thing started on April 23rd, 1929. Professor Bergen Davis from Columbia University came up and gave a colloquium in a laboratory in the old building. He told Dr. Whitney, myself, and a few others something about what he was going to talk about beforehand, and he was very enthusiastic about it, and he got us interested in it.
The Davis-Barnes-Barnes, mitogenetic rays, and N-rays could be used for the understanding of the Six Characteristic Symptoms of Pathological Science. They have things in common. These are cases where there is no dishonesty involved but where people are tricked into false results by a lack of understanding about what human beings can do to themselves in the way of being led astray by subjective effects, wishful thinking, or threshold interactions. These are examples of pathological science, which is so common these days and in recent decades.
In general, it could be said: These are things that attracted a great deal of attention. Usually, hundreds of papers have been published on them. Sometimes they have lasted for fifteen or twenty years, and then they gradually die away.
Patents, publicity, and reality
There are three types of legal protections for the expression of an idea. 1) Patent; 2) Copyright; and 3) Trademark. They are different; they have different histories and philosophies, but they are the only three tools that are used to protect creative ideas or the results of a creative process called creativity or innovation.
In regard to patents, it is an absolute must to know at least about the basic differences between the history and practices in the home country, the US, and Europe, including the revised text of the convention, informally called the EPC 2000, which entered into force on December 13, 2007.
In regard to copyrights, it is important to understand the essence of the section of the US Constitution that gives Congress the power to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing authors, for a limited time, the exclusive right to their writings. Therefore, it is important to know that copyrights derive from the Constitution and constitute an entire body of law.
Question to be answered: Why cannot I copyright the artwork that goes into making the PC chips?
Trademarks and service marks are governed entirely differently from patent and copyright law. The – US trademarks are governed by common law. It goes back to the old guilds in England and Europe. There is a public interest involved in the trademark.
Registration of trademarks requires a thorough consideration of three important issues: 1) The word itself; 2) The form of the word; and 3) The goods on which it is used. There are some 40 different categories, of which approx. 30 relate to goods, 5 to services, and the rest belong to categories that cover all kinds of things.
As the publicity should be considered seriously, it is important to accept the need for trade secrets or proprietary information. It may often be better not to apply for a patent. Those involved in creativity, coaching, and similar activities should distinguish between what is customary and what is legal and consider the term fair use doctrine.
Last but not least, and because I consider it very important to all involved in research and applied sciences, let me give a citation from the NYT of December 2012, written by Carl Zimmer: A recent US Supreme Court decision and an analysis of the peer review system substantiate complaints about this fundamental aspect of scientific research. Far from filtering out junk science, peer review may be blocking the flow of innovation and corrupting public support for science. If peer review were a drug, it would never be allowed on the market because we do not have convincing evidence of its benefits but a lot of evidence of its flows.
Therefore, it is important to know that only 8% of the Scientific Research Society’s members agreed that peer review works well as it is (Chubin, 1990, p. 192).
Examples of challenges
One of the biggest problems in modern theoretical physics is the quantization of gravity. This seeks to link the three pillars of modern physics: general relativity, quantum theory, and statistical physics. The most successful attempt in recent decades is the theory of loop quantum gravity.
This theory has succeeded in defining well the quanta of space and of time. It seems that neither infinitesimal dimensions nor infinitesimal time intervals really exist. One of the implications of this theory is that reality is not what it seems.
Western and Eastern, especially younger generations and political elites and their advisors, do not realize that Russia’s role in the context of Western culture as a whole is not in conservative opposition to capitalism but in realizing alternative developments and addressing the challenges posed by the current form of neoliberal capitalism and globalization.
In an article entitled Russia and Revolution (1849), Tutchev identifies two real opposing forces in Europe that may start fighting each other as early as tomorrow. Such a struggle does not lead to the transformation of people from the mode of possessing to the mode of being and to the strengthening of their empathy and concern for other people and nature. Nor does it lead to the realization of the desire for recognition in a struggle in which the opponent must not be killed; it is, after all, about his recognition (said Kozhev). Nor does it lead to the birth of a human society of united humanity (said Marx). Such a struggle does not permit agreement, because it means the death of one and the life of the other.
Tutchev wrote in 1866 about reason, rationality, pride, and German classical philosophy: Germany, there is no doubt, is a country in which strange ideas have been long stacked side by side. It was the land of order because it was peaceful, and no one wanted to see the horrible anarchy in the head (of reason) filling and devastating brains. It only took sixty years of the Enlightenment for virtually all Christian values to disappear and the pride of reason to prevail. This revolution gave birth to a hatred of Russia that reciprocated with charity. Today (1866, author’s note), hatred has reached its peak (climax) and is triumphing over not only common sense but also the instinct of self-preservation. Pride disturbs order. With hindsight, we know that Tuchev meant bourgeois revolution and a critique of bourgeois modernity. This makes the article Russia and Revolution not only topical but also a compass for a way out of the situation these days.
Nature-like technologies
Everybody knows when science began. Aristotles told us that Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes (6th-century Ionian philosophers) were the first to investigate natural phenomena. But in modern times, since the Renaissance, theory, experimentation, and observation have been crucial to science.
For reasons of time restriction and as an example, I would recommend studying and understanding in full the function of photosynthesis. It is the process used by green plants and a few organisms that use sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water to prepare their food. The process of photosynthesis converts light energy into chemical energy. At present, we know two types: oxygenic photosynthesis and anoxygenic photosynthesis.
On the practical side, I refer to an article of which I am the co-author and which deals with an important challenge: the implications of the quantization of production factors. As economics is concerned with the definition of terms, measurement, and the expression of mutual relationships among those quantities, the mathematical device that allows for the creation of mathematical models uses simplified realities as part of their explanatory power. These models make it possible to describe a comprehensive set of relationships as well as to make experiments and predictions.
Conclusion
In the conclusion of this paper, I briefly offer why we need to follow the path of the new modernity and not the old one. We are on a journey into the unknown, not least because we have allowed the principles of quantum physics, mechanics, chemistry, and biology to enter our lives. This entry is being evaluated in many places, and the results are few or not published. Without giving away secrets, I would like to mention indicatively the quantum advantages of society (socium nostrum visitamus) and their consequences (in this case on geopolitics, diplomacy, and the new world order).
Quantum computer calculations in the non-binary range from 0 to 1 can have revolutionary effects not only on finance but also on social life. In the new divine politics of time, there is room for objective social dialectics, its reflection in triadic thought, quantum mobilization in the humanities post-quantum methods of cryptography, and not least the development of civilized (human) neo-industrialism. Therefore, one of the real and possible forms of the new society is the so-called quantum society, the development of which will cause a great deal of human waste on the part of the ignorant and omniscient.
How many of us are already on the way to becoming members of society and how many are on the way to becoming a waste, I do not know, but I suspect. In the accompaniment of COVID-19, cover-ups, government mandates, psychic epidemics, and ignoring reality, we forget that our behavior supports trends that seek to transform humans into commodities (objects to be bought and sold) and attachments to IT products and sources of profit and consumerism. The cult of work, into the cult of consumerism, entertainment, and services, and the circle of family life as a cultural code and matrix (past, present, future) into a linear journey through the swamp. I wish all to find their own and right way, leading to the solution of the key challenges ahead of us. Consent is not needed. 27.11.2023
Who is Dr. Jan Campbell?
Jan Campbell is a German citizen of Czech nationality, an analyst. He was born in 1946. Until November 2014, he headed Campbell Concept UG Bonn and worked as an assistant professor at the Faculty of Business Administration at the University of Economics in Prague. Until the pandemic, he also worked as a visiting scholar at foreign universities, including heading the EU coordination office for the TACIS programme in the early 1990s and serving as an EU advisor to two prime ministers of the Kyrgyz Republic. He has also worked in a number of other countries, including the UK, Italy, Switzerland, Malaysia, the USSR, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia, the Czech Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany. In Russia, he received the honorary title of professor at the Ural State Agrarian University. In Slovakia, he won the Golden Biatec Award in 2014 for “Completely new perspectives on past and present events in domestic and foreign media, but especially in his professional practice in a number of international and national public and private organisations.
