“科学游行”席卷全球 是为科学还是为政治？

据组织者介绍，今年4月22日“为科学游行”活动当天，全球600多个城市共有几千名科学家和活动家走上街头。和其他大游行一样，游行参与者的动机也多种多样。但以往尽量远离政治的社会活动家和科学家群体联合发声，能看出当今美国社会分裂程度日益加深。

今年学界人士参加“为科学游行”源于特朗普政府提出削减科研经费，并且下令限制政府机关的科学家发表公开讲话。外界普遍认为，特朗普的封口令是压制气候变化研究手段的一部分。

而许多“为科学游行”的参与者表示，游行也不是完全为了针对特朗普政府，更重要是强调政府资助科研和基于科学依据做决策的重要性。他们认为这是不存在党派之分的议题。其实特朗普政府上台前决策时科学依据下降的问题就已存在。

此外，这次游行也凸显新变化。今年1月宣布发起“为科学游行”后，组织者修改了活动的使命，同时呼吁科研工作者多元化。新加入的诉求让此次游行更倾向左翼政治势力，可能使右翼保守派孤立，也可能削弱游行科学家对政府否认气候变化的抗议力度：比如美国共和党人原本就极不信任宣称全球变暖的科学家。

一些评论人士甚至声称，科学行为努力寻求的并非放之四海而皆准的真理，而是受科学家社会背景影响的理论。言下之意是，性别、性向和种族会影响科学家的信仰，导致偏见。某些历史问题上科学的作用确实存在争议，比如所谓“科学”的种族理论就曾被种族主义利用。怀疑气候变化发现的人也喜欢一再强调科学本质上存在歧视。

总之，今年许多人会上街游行大声呼吁科学，强调科学对世界的意义。同时还有很多人关注为何科学未能制止社会问题影响扩大。参与者见识开阔或许可以大为提升本次游行的影响力，但公开游行通常存在的问题依然没解决——游行者回家后还是弄不清闹腾半天到底为了什么。（财富中文网）

译者：Pessy

审稿：夏林

The March for Science will bring thousands of scientists and activists to the streets today in, according to organizers, more than 600 cities across the world. Like any mass demonstration, participants will attend with a wide range of motivations. But the mingling of the activist community and the science community, which often tries to distance itself from politics, has produced a specific kind of public fragmentation.

Motivation for the March has come from proposed cuts to research funding by the Trump administration, and administration orders restraining government scientists from making public statements. That gag order has been widely seen as part of an administration agenda to restrict climate change research.

But many involved in the March say its goal is less to tar the Trump administration than to highlight the overall importance of science funding and evidence-based policymaking, which they see as a nonpartisan agenda. The undermining of scientific evidence is, undeniably, an issue that far predates the Trump administration.

But another focus has also emerged. Since it was first announced in January, organizers have revised the March’s mission to also include calls for greater diversity within the scientific community itself. That agenda pulls the March further to the left of the current political landscape, potentially alienating right-wing conservatives. That could be damaging to the March's efforts to push back against climate-change denial in particular: American Republicans, for instance, overwhelmingly distrust scientists and their claims about global warming.

Some commentators have gone so far as to describe science as an endeavor that seeks, not universal truth, but a truth shaped by scientists’ social context. That implicitly includes their beliefs and biases on gender, sexuality, and race. Science has a distinctly mixed track record on these issues, having for instance lent considerable support to ‘scientific’ theories of race. The idea that science is subject to bias is also frequently reiterated by those who doubt its findings on climate.

In short, many marchers today will be on the street celebrating science and its importance to the world. At the same time, others will be focusing on science’s failure to resist certain broader social problems. While that breadth of vision may have helped make the March such a huge phenomenon, it also presents a risk all too common for public demonstrations – that after the marchers go home, no one will be entirely sure what it was all about.