Steven Pinker: It's hard to see how China will ever compete with the West

In the latest issue of Edge the well-known Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker
questions the popular assertion that "China will be the next scientific
and economic power." What prompted Pinker to question that assertion
seems to be the recent rejection by the People's Republic of China
(PRC) to publish the book: What Is Your Dangerous Idea?: Today's Leading Thinkers on the Unthinkable.

The book, based on an edited selection from The 2006 Edge Question,
was published last year in the US (HarperCollins) and the UK (Free
Press) as well as a number of foreign-language markets. The recent
rejection came via the publisher that purchased the PRC Chinese
language rights to the book, stating that the book "can't be published
in China because some content is not accordant to Chinese regulations,
for example, some content about religious, soul." [sic]

Pinker,
who wrote the forward to the book, went on to not only question China's
power grab but the claim that any nation can become a technological
superpower (and thus economical superpower) when it can be categorized
as anti-intellectual. "There is a profound issue lurking here," writes
Pinker. "Everyone says that China will be the next scientific and
economic power. Is this compatible with their ongoing rejection of open
debate and exploration of ideas? Is a technologically advanced society
compatible with anti-intellectualism and suppression of debate? It's
hard to see how China will ever compete with the West as a source of
scientific and technological innovation if ideas cannot be discussed
and evaluated."



Pinker goes on to state one possibility, "or will the Internet — which
can never be completely censored — and a stream of PhDs returning from
the West eventually pressure them to open up?" As ideal as this would
seem to most free speech advocates, it does not seem to be consistent
with the observed direction of China.



Typically, many westerners that live and work in China do so in the
capacity of an expert and are hardly challenged on free speech issues.
It is only when a foreigner appears to be "corrupting" a sizable number
of natives that the PRC will exert its control and send the foreigner
packing with little hope of ever returning; however such instances in
the last two decades are quite rare. Instead, westerners are free to
work
and play which essentially amounts to a knowledge transfer from
westerners to the locals. Once this knowledge transfer is wielded by a
local it then comes under full regulation by the PRC. A system such as
this allows for societal roles and industry to be created under
complete control with little "corruption" to the system itself. Such a
system may not be a key innovator in the technology and science worlds
but can however take and assimilate knowledge into powerhouse
technology industries at a scale unique to countries like China and
India.



While Pinker's questions are valid their conclusions do not appear to
be consistent with how China is growing both technologically and
scientifically. As for the book, the Chinese living in China will not be
reading it any time soon.