Core Concept - The article discusses the concept of "blind spots" in both vision and scientific understanding, emphasizing that humans often overlook evident truths due to cognitive biases, which shape their perception of modern science [3][6][8]. Group 1: Understanding Science - Science has become an indispensable cognitive tool in daily life, necessitating awareness of inherent "blind spots" and the historical context of scientific discourse [6]. - Different attitudes towards science exist, with some viewing it as an endless potential for discovery, while others caution against its rapid development, suggesting a need for reevaluation to prevent irreversible harm to society and the environment [6][7]. - The authors of "What is Science" diagnose a crisis in modern science, attributing it to the adoption of a "blind spot" worldview that obscures the true nature of scientific inquiry [6][8]. Group 2: Limitations of Modern Science - Modern science, while rooted in human subjective experience, is increasingly distancing itself from direct experience, leaning towards mathematical abstraction [7]. - The limitations of modern science are highlighted in addressing complex global challenges such as climate change, habitat destruction, and emerging diseases, revealing the inadequacies of abstract theories in practical applications [7][8]. - The authors argue that the over-reliance on abstract theories has hindered humanity's ability to effectively address real-world issues [7][8]. Group 3: The Nature of Scientific Inquiry - The book emphasizes that science is a product of human experience, and the process of refining this experience has led to a perception of scientific authority [8]. - The authors critique the reductionist view in life sciences, advocating for a holistic understanding of life that acknowledges its dynamic and autonomous nature [11]. - The final sections of the book reflect on the impact of the "blind spot" worldview on environmental issues, linking it to global crises like climate change and pandemics [11][12]. Group 4: Overcoming Blind Spots - The authors propose that recognizing the existence of blind spots is the first step towards overcoming them, advocating for a rejection of errors that neglect human experience [12]. - They do not dismiss the value of science or abstract thinking but criticize the philosophical bias that leads to overlooking human experience [12].

Group 1 - The 2025 China Science and Technology Journal Development Forum was held in Beijing, focusing on the theme "Breaking Boundaries, Restructuring, Empowering - Building a New Ecology of Academic Publishing" [1][8] - The forum included keynote reports and four thematic discussion panels, covering topics such as enhancing journal quality through platform support, constructing an independent evaluation system for journals, and building first-class journals [1][8] - The "Academic Association" platform was launched at the forum, aiming to integrate resources and provide comprehensive services for journal publishing and academic integrity monitoring [5][7] Group 2 - Keynote reports were presented by prominent figures, including the Vice Chairman of the China Association for Science and Technology and editors from various scientific journals, discussing the role of journals in industrial innovation and the impact of AI on academic platforms [3][5] - The forum is part of the "China Science and Technology Journal Excellence Action Plan," which aims to enhance the academic quality and influence of journals, as well as promote independent publishing and data platform development [8]

Core Insights - China continues to lead in scientific research output, expanding its advantage according to the Nature Index 2025 Research Leaders list [1][2] - The data reflects a significant shift in the global research landscape, with China's sustained investment in technology translating into rapid growth in high-quality research output [2] Summary by Categories Research Output - China's share in the Nature Index reached 32,122, a year-on-year increase of approximately 17% [1] - The United States follows with a share of 22,083, while Germany, the UK, Japan, and France also rank among the top contributors [1] Institutional Rankings - Among the top ten global institutions, eight are Chinese, with the Chinese Academy of Sciences ranked first [1] - Other notable Chinese institutions include the University of Science and Technology of China (3rd), Zhejiang University (4th), Peking University (5th), and Tsinghua University (7th) [1] Regional Trends - Asian countries are strengthening their positions, with South Korea rising to 7th place, surpassing Canada [1] - India remains in 9th place, while Western countries have seen a decline in their adjusted shares for the second consecutive year, with decreases of at least 7% for Canada, France, Switzerland, the UK, and the US [1]

Group 1 - In the first quarter of this year, the number of overseas job applications and views by American researchers increased by over 30% year-on-year, indicating a shift in focus towards international opportunities due to significant cuts in U.S. research funding [1] - A notable increase in overseas job applications was observed, with a 32% rise in applications and a 35% increase in views from U.S. users, particularly a 68% increase in views in March alone [1] - The termination of over 200 federal grants for AIDS-related research and cuts to COVID-19 research funding by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have contributed to this trend [1] Group 2 - A survey conducted by Nature magazine revealed that over 75% of researchers expressed a desire to leave the U.S., with Europe and Canada being the preferred destinations [2] - Job applications from U.S. scientists to Europe and Canada increased by 32% and 42% respectively, while applications from European and Canadian researchers to U.S. institutions decreased by 41% and 13% [2] Group 3 - Several European countries and academic institutions are actively seeking to attract U.S. researchers, with the European Research Council (ERC) doubling its relocation budget for funded researchers [3] - Initiatives such as the Marie Curie Actions program and special visa provisions for top talent are being explored to enhance Europe's appeal to international researchers [3] - French President Macron emphasized the importance of research and innovation, inviting global researchers to choose France and Europe [3] Group 4 - Despite efforts to attract talent, Europe faces challenges such as insufficient funding for higher education compared to the U.S., with total R&D spending in the EU at €381 billion (approximately $411 billion) versus the U.S. at an estimated $940 billion [4] - The European University Association reported a pessimistic outlook on future government investments due to recent funding cuts and ongoing global political tensions [4] - Salary and research resources are critical factors for applicants considering positions in Europe, with concerns about lower income levels compared to the U.S. [4][5] Group 5 - The competition for attracting researchers is intensifying, with initiatives like Aix-Marseille University's "Safe Place for Science" offering funding for displaced U.S. researchers [7] - Interest in job opportunities in Asian countries is also rising among U.S. researchers, with a 30% increase in views and a 20% increase in applications for positions in China [7] - The competitive landscape for academic positions in Hong Kong is becoming more challenging due to the influx of returning researchers from North America [7]