饒毅致信美國科技官員:科學家應該有脊梁

（原標題：饒毅致信美國科技官員：科學家應該有脊梁）

撰文 | 饒 毅

美國華盛頓特區

國立健康研究 院（NIH）院長

Francis Collins醫學博士、哲學博士

親愛的柯林斯博士：

你備受尊重，因為你是研究人類疾病基因變化出類拔萃的科學家，也是令人尊重的、宗旨為「探求生命系統本質和行為根本知識、用於增強健康、延長生命、減少疾患」的國立健康研究院（NIH）的院長。

人們歡呼NIH為改善美國人民和全人類的健康所作出的貢獻。其傳統和標準繼承了全人類的文明，而希臘、印度、中國的古代文化都曾對人類文明有所貢獻。

智力傳承在國家之間交換了很長時間。西方從中國學習了造紙術、指南針、火藥和活字印刷，美國從歐洲學習了很多。

科學家不能屈服於政治人物

你8月20日所謂美國生物醫學研究面臨威脅的信令人震驚，因為這是和平時期第一次政府官員限制科學交流。

而如《科學美國人》以下報導的內容更駭人聽聞：「柯林斯致信約一萬個接受NIH資助的機構，鼓勵它們與聯邦調查局（FBI）地區辦公室開會，討論對於智慧財產權的威脅和外國幹涉」。整個人類歷史上，從來沒有一個科學家邀請過類似FBI的機構監測「外國幹涉」。有些政府這樣做過，但不是因為領袖科學家或擔任領導職務的科學家發起。即使在蘇聯最黑暗的時期，領袖科學家也有脊梁做相反的：物理學家卡皮查營救了他的學生朗道，後者在史達林權力（和恐怖）頂峰時期被調查反史達林行為。

因此，你的信和你鼓勵FBI調查的行動，大大偏離了科學實踐的常軌。

幾年前，你在上海公開稱：科學沒有國界，因為它屬於人類。

這句話被廣泛翻譯，人們交口稱讚。

柯林斯博士：你那時說的是真理。

真理就是真理。不能因為政治領導人或律師說的不同，科學家就扭曲真理。

科學的永恆和科學家的道德勇氣

科學是永恆的；而政治，特別是今天美國正在實踐的那種，是短暫的。歷史證明，劣質政治會滅亡，正如蘇聯和納粹德國所證明的。

我同情大多數美國科學家，你們雖然被教育——也常常自認為——道德正直，其實通常不熟悉歷史，不懂如何處理如納粹德國或蘇聯那種邪惡政治壓力。

附件推薦一篇文章（「The Singular Moral Compass of Otto Krayer」），記敘一位德國藥理學家，在其事業早期，他拒絕接任因納粹開除猶太科學家而空出的系主任職位。他可以接受這一職位，不因社會之惡而怪罪自己，但他在完全預見對自己事業的損害情況下，寫信拒絕就職。此後他被納粹禁止任學術職位、連圖書館都不能用。他被迫離開德國不是因為他是猶太人，而是因為他敢於申張正義、聲討罪惡。

最終受納粹和史達林主義損害最大的是德國和俄國。希特勒上臺之前，德國在數學、物理、化學和你自己研究的遺傳學專業都遙遙領先，之後德國科學再也沒達到那時的水平。

歷史可以重複，如果我們不從過去汲取教訓，即使是其他國家的教訓。

如今川普主義盛行的美國，對美國人，包括美國科學家，都是考驗的時刻。

目前，川普主義對科學的主要威脅不過是減少預算，與事業被毀、生命被滅還不能相比。但如此下滑，我們怎麼知道，在很多學生是外國人、一批教授也是外國人的情況下，有什麼可以阻擋競爭的實驗室之間不去互相舉報「外國影響「？以後的科學討論，需要分成「美國」和「外國」嗎？科學學會的年度會議，應該拒絕「外國影響」嗎？NIH資助的美國國內和國際會議，應該請FBI來監控嗎？

現在是美國科學家顯示自己脊梁的時刻。

科學家及其選擇支持的自由

所有科學家都有選擇其工作地點的自由，有選擇他們認為合適的合作對象的自由。

科學研究可以被任何合法資助機構所支持。政府機構是全世界資助科學的主要來源，這是大家接受的現實。每個科學家接受多個來源的資助也從來不是問題，即使資助來源於多個國家。

就在2015年，你自己領導的NIH與中國的國家自然科學基金會（NSFC）宣布共同資助美中生物醫學合作項目(https://grants.nih.gov/grants/gui-de/rfa-files/RFA-AI-16-006.html)。因此你8月20日聲明中所謂「NIH知道有國外實體發起了系統的計劃影響NIH研究人員和同行評審」是徹頭徹尾的謊言，除非你暗示NIH是陰謀的發起者和積極的伴侶。這明顯是指中國，俄國連自己的科學都難以支持，歐洲和日本沒有發起新計劃。中國發起了招募科學家的計劃，無論國籍，但因為語言和文化的原因，多半還是華人。中國沒有試圖影響NIH研究人員或同行評議。NIH歪曲事實到了無恥的地步。每個國家都有招募的權利。世界應該歡迎越來越多的國家投資科學、支持科學家，因為科學服務於全世界。

因為政府科學基金機構都不享有研究經費支持的研究所帶來的專利或其他智力產權，保護專利、合作時合理分配專利完全不在NIH的管轄範圍。事實上，30年來，NIH都資助了在中國國內的研究。這些中國研究人員自然都有中國機構的經費。難道你要說這些研究人員代表外國影響？而且他們所有的智慧財產權屬於其單位，中國和美國的政府基金都不能擁有其智慧財產權，所以由NIH爭智慧財產權是虛偽的。絕大多數研究並不能產生很有價值的智慧財產權。如果少數研究人員沒有填報多重來源，不過是個人瑕疵，你8月20日聲明稱這種問題為「外國幹涉」完全是小題大做。

雖然在美國誕生前，中國在經濟上領先世界，但在美國存在的這些年中國的經濟相對貧窮，長期難以負擔科學經費。現在中國資助科學，既為中國發展，也為世界做貢獻。中國資助純數學和天文學，它們短期不會給任何國家帶來經濟利益，也許永遠不能。NIH自己宣稱的目標也不是產生經濟回報，這是一個不能因為情人眼裡出西施就可以改變的事實。所以，生物醫學研究一般不應該帶來不同國家、不同政府之間的矛盾。

你的道德傳承

你的母校維吉尼亞大學的創始者湯瑪斯·傑弗遜，既是智力巨人，也是自由的旗手。如果他今天活著，他會為你的聲明或行動鼓掌嗎

你在耶魯大學的研究導師，來自一個有偉大才華的文化，但在西方碰到自己製造的問題的時候常把他們作為替罪羊。猶太人經常被迫害，時而公開而殘酷，時如蒙有面紗但也無情。你8月20日的聲明無疑針對華裔科學家，似乎要在美國反智非理性的浪潮中用華人代替猶太人做新的替罪羊。

無論是合作還是競爭，徐立之博士於1980年代在發現囊性纖維化罹患基因的過程中，起了重要作用，你也為此共享成果。1980年代，中國還窮，無法提供經濟支持。如果這在今天發生，有可能徐博士也會得到中國的支持。你會電話要FBI調查他嗎？

如果多個經費機構決定都投入資源支持值得支持的研究，應該歡迎，而不是調查。

簡單的建議

已故的麥肯恩參議員曾說：「我希望認為在最艱難的時刻，我做了對的事情，不過你無法知道，除非你被考驗」。

今天可能是迄今以來對大多數美國科學家最艱難考驗的時刻，特別是對那些在領導職位的人來說。但願不會變得更艱難。

任何願意出任你8月20日提出的顧問委員會之成員的科學家，都將染上道德汙點。這一委員會應該被解散。你的信應該撤回。

美國科學家會「做對的事情」嗎？至少不心甘情願、主動做錯的事情？歷史將記錄美國科學家能否經受人格和榮譽的真正考驗。

希望有更多國際合作

生物醫學是進行國際交流與合作最容易的領域，因為它與軍事無關，而又對全人類有普適價值。

中國在積極醞釀開始中國腦計劃、美國NIH已經有腦計劃。中國感興趣支持腦研究的國際合作，部分原因是促進有利於世界各國人民的研究，部分原因是現在中國不如以前那麼窮之後，努力為人類共同目標付出中國的一分。

在這種轉折點，NIH應該拋棄與FBI的合作、或自降體面地散布「國外幹涉」的嚇人謠言，改弦更張，擁抱所有支持生物醫學的國家。

中國有長期欣賞智力貢獻的傳統，但我們的科學沒有做到我們應該做的程度。為了成為世界有責任的成員，中國現在提高對科學的支持。應該歡迎所有支持科學的國家。如果有競爭，應該如奧林匹克運動一樣。

生物醫學研究的成果為全人類所共享；科學是有助於不同國家人民之間相互理解的主要橋梁之一。

誠摯的,

饒毅, 哲學博士

北京大學-IDG/麥戈文腦研究所教授、所長

北京大學理學部主任

北京腦中心主任

中國北京

注1：Truth is truth，源自2018年8月美國總統的律師Rudy Giuliani在接受電視訪談時稱「truth isn’t truth」, 被反駁。

注2：「事實是情人眼裡出西施」，認為事實也不是事實，而是因觀察者而異。英文「情人眼裡出西施」為「beauty is in the eyes of the beholder」。在同一電視訪談中，Giuliani稱「facts are in the eyes of the beholder」。

注3：Collins本科念維吉尼亞大學，其創辦者為美國第三任總統傑弗遜。Collins的研究生導師為耶魯大學教授、猶太移民後代。Collins最重要的研究為克隆囊性纖維化（cystic fibrosis）的罹患基因，這一工作最重要的科學家是香港旅加拿大華人學者徐立之，徐後來曾出任香港大學校長。

Francis Collins, M.D., Ph.D.

Director

The National Institutes of Health

Washington, DC

USA

Dear Dr. Collins,

You are highly respected as a scientist who has carried out outstanding research on genetic mutations underlying human diseases, and as a leader of the NIH whose mission 「is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability」.

NIH is lauded for its contributions to improving the health of Americans, as well as the health of the humankind. Its tradition and standards are the heritage of human civilizations, to which ancient cultures from the Greek, the Indian, and the Chinese have all contributed.

Intellectual legacy and heritage have been exchanged internationally for a long time. The West has learned about paper manufacturing, the compass, the gunpowder, and printing from China. The US has learned much from Europe.

Scientists with Spines Do Not Bend to Politicians

Your August 20th statement is shocking because it is the first time when any government official has issued a statement restricting scientific collaborations in peacetime.

Furthermore, the following, as reported in Scientific American is appalling: 「Collins also wrote to roughly 10,000 NIH grant institutions encouraging them to set up briefings with FBI field offices about threats to intellectual property and foreign interference.」 No SCIENTIST in the entire history of humankind has asked FBI equivalents to monitor 「foreign interference」. Some governments have done so, but not at the initiation of leading scientists or scientists in leadership positions. Even in the worst times of the Soviet Union, leading scientists had the spine to do the opposite: the physicist Pyotr Kapitsa rescued his student Lev Landau when the latter was investigated for anti-Stalin activities in the peak of Stalin’s power (and terror).

Your letter and your action of encouraging FBI collaborations are thus extraordinary deviations from the normal practice of science.

You publicly stated a few years ago in Shanghai: science has no national boundaries because it belongs to the humankind. This was translated and widely applauded.

Dr. Collins: what you said then is the truth.

Truth is truth. No scientist can bend the truth just because political leaders or lawyers say otherwise.

The Eternality of Science and the Moral Courage of Scientists

Science is eternal, whereas politics, as the kind practiced in the present day US, is transient. History has proved that bad politics perish, as in the cases of the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. The Trumpism US will be an exception only if the Sun rises from the West in the future.

I am sympathetic that most US scientists, while always taught, and often self-assumed, to be morally upright, usually do not understand history and do not know how to deal with political pressures of the evil nature, such as those in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

Attached please find an article (「The Singular Moral Compass of Otto Krayer」) about a German pharmacologist, who, while in his early budding career, refused to take up a chairmanship opened up by Nazi firing of a Jewish scientist. While he could have accepted the position, without blaming himself for societal ills, Krayer wrote a letter of refusal, fully anticipating damages to his own career. He was thereafter barred from all academic jobs and even the use of libraries in Germany. He had to leave Germany, not because he was Jewish, but because he stood up for what was right and against what was wrong.

In the end, Nazism and Stalinism had damaged Germany and Russia the most. Germany, which was leading in mathematics, physics, chemistry and your own field of genetics before Hitler, has never been able to regain its scientific strength to the level reached before Nazism.

History can repeat itself if we do not learn from the past, even if the past was in other countries.

With Trumpism presently prevalent in the US, it is a testing time for many Americans including American scientists.

At this point, Trumpism in the US can mainly threaten science with reduction of budgets, nothing compared to careers ruined or lives destroyed. If allowed to go on the slippery road, how do we know that competing labs will not report on each other for foreign interferences or influences when a large number of students and a significant number of faculty members are foreign-born Should future discussions of science be separated into 「American」 and 「Foreign」 Should future classrooms, meeting rooms, etc., be similarly separated Should annual meetings of academic societies and associations refuse to have 「foreign influences」 Should NIH funded domestic and international meetings be monitored by the FBI

It is time for American scientists to show their spines.

Freedom of Scientists and Their Choices of Support

All scientists have the right to work wherever they choose, and the freedom to collaborate with whomever they deem appropriate.

Scientific research can be supported by any legitimate funding agency, most of which are governmental across the entire world. Funding of individual scientists by multiple sources is not an issue of concern, even when funding comes from different countries.

As recent as 2015, your own NIH and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) announced the U.S.-China Program for Biomedical Collaborative Research (R01) (https://gr-ants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-AI-16-006.html). So, the statement in your August 20th letter that 「NIH is aware that some foreign entities have mounted systematic programs to influence NIH researchers and peer reviewers" is a total lie unless you are implying that the NIH is an initiating and active partner in such a conspiracy. This is clearly targeting China because Russia can barely fund its science, Europe and Japan have not launched any new programs. China has launched new programs to recruit scientists, regardless of national origin but most are scientists of Chinese origin because of linguistic and cultural differences. China has not tried to influence NIH researchers or peer reviewers. The 「Thousand Talent Program」 is to recruit more scientists, not to influence any other country. NIH is shameless in distorting the truth. Any and every country has the right to recruitment. The world should welcome more and more countries to invest in science and support scientists because science serves the entire world.

Because no government agency for science funding holds patents or other intellectual properties resulting from research supported by their grants, it is completely outside the scope of the NIH but in the realm of institutions to protect their intellectual properties (IP) and to assign proper rights to the collaborators in cases of collaborations. NIH has funded researchers in China for more than 30 years. Naturally, all those supported by the NIH also have grants from Chinese funding agencies. Are you going to say that all these investigators represent foreign influences Furthermore, all their IPs belong to their institutions. It is hypocritical for the NIH to argue about IPs when neither the Chinese nor the US government funding agencies are involved in IPs. The vast majority of grants never lead to valuable IPs. If a few researchers fail to report multiple sources, it is but a small fault of an individual with minor consequences, which was blown out of proportion by your August 20th statement as foreign interferences.

China, having led the world economically before the birth of the US, was relatively poor economically and could not afford to fund science for most of the time when the US has been in existence. China is now capable of funding science, both for the development of China and as a contribution to the world. China funds pure mathematics and astronomy, which are not expected to generate any economic benefits for any particular country in a short time, if ever. The stated mission of the NIH is not to generate economic benefits, either, a fact that should not change in the eyes of the beholder. Thus funding for most of the biomedical sciences should not be a source of conflict between different countries.

Your Conscientious Heritage

Thomas Jefferson, the founder of your alma mater the University of Virginia, was an intellectual giant, and a champion for freedom. Had he been alive today, would he applaud your letter or action

Your own research advisor at Yale came from a culture of great talents which were made scapegoats whenever Westerners run into troubles of their own making. The Jewish people were often persecuted, sometimes blatantly and sometimes in a thinly veiled manner. Your August 20th letter is obviously targeting scientists of Chinese origin, making Chinese as the new scapegoat of anti-intellectual irrationality in the US.

Whether collaborating or competing, Dr. Lap-Chee Tsui played an important role in the success of discovering the cystic fibrosis susceptibility gene in the 1980s, for which you shared the credit. In the 1980s, China was poor and could not offer financial support. Had the same happened today, it is possible that Dr. Tsui would also receive support from China. Would you call the FBI to investigate him

If funding agencies decide to pool in resources for worthy research, that should be welcome, not investigated.

Simple Suggestions

The late John McCain once remarked: 「I like to think that in the toughest moments I』d do the right thing, but you never know until you are tested」.

This is certainly the toughest moment so far for most American scientists, especially those in leadership positions. One can only wish that it would not get any tougher.

Any scientist willing to serve on the Advisory Committee stipulated in your August 10th letter will be morally tainted. The Committee should be disbanded. The letter should be retracted.

Will leading American scientists do the right thing, or at least not willingly and proactively do the wrong thing History will remember how American scientists stand a true test of character and honor.

Hope for More International Collaborations

Because it is not related to the military and because of its universal values to the humankind, international exchanges and collaborations are the easiest in the biomedical sciences.

China is actively planning to start the Chinese Brain Initiative. The US NIH already has a Brain Initiative. China is interested in supporting international collaborations in brain research, partly to promote research that will benefit people of all countries, partly as an effort to pay our share for common goal snow that China is not as poor as before.

At such junctures, NIH should discard short-sighted collaborations with the FBI or self-degrading fear-mongering of 「foreign interferences」, and instead embrace efforts by all countries to support biomedical research.

China has a long tradition of valuing intellectual contributions, but our science has not been as good as it should. To become a responsible member of the world, China is now increasing its support in the sciences. All countries should be welcome for their support of science. If there are competitions, the Olympic Games have shown us how to compete.

Fruits of biomedical research will be enjoyed by all humans; science will remain a major bridge of mutual understanding between people of different countries and cultures.

Sincerely yours,

Yi Rao, Ph.D.

Professor and Director, PKU-IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research

Dean, Division of Sciences, Peking University

Director, Chinese Institute for Brain Research, Beijing

China

本文來源：知識分子 責任編輯：喬俊婧_NBJ11279