论文部分内容阅读
中国共产党中国科学院支部,在本年四月间,讨论了该院前遗传选种实验馆馆长乐天宇同志所犯的错误。支部大会认为:这个错误的性质是属于严重的无组织无纪律,严重的脱离群众的学阀作风,以及学术工作上的严重的非马克思主义倾向,为了进一步批判乐天宇同志在生物科学工作上的错误,政务院文化教育委员会计划局科学卫生处会同中国科学院计划局在本年四月至六月间先后召集了三次生物科学工作座谈会。还讨论了目前生物科学的状况及其中若干问题,并对今后工作交换了初步的意见。参加这三次座谈会的有竺可桢(中国科学院),赵沨、孟庆哲、何祚庥(政务院文化教育委员会计划局),耿光波、陈仁(中央农业部),张景钺、刘次元(北京大学),周家炽、姜炳权、朱振声(北京农业大学),陈凤桐、祖德明(华北农业科学研究所),钱崇澍、吴徵镒(中国科学院植物分类研究所),乐天宇、徐纬英、梁正兰、胡含(中国科学院遗传选种实验馆),李健武(清华大学),金成忠(中国科学院植物生理研究室),黄作杰、孙济中(中国科学院达尔文主义研究班),恽子强、丁瓒、汪志华、何成钧、简焯坡(中国科学院编译局及计划局)等人。本文是前两次座谈会的结论,在最后一次座谈会上,上述到会者基本上同意本文中的论点。其中如最后列举的各项工作,还只是初步的意见,有待于更深入的讨论。关于目前生物科学的状况,特别是关于摩尔根主义对旧生物学各方面的影响,需要继续展开系统的批判。本文转载自1952年6月29日人民日报,在文字上曾作了若干修改。
In April this year, the branch of the Chinese Academy of Sciences held a discussion on the mistake made by Comrade Lotte Tianyu, the curator of the genetic selection experiment lab of the hospital. The branch conference held: This erroneous nature belongs to the serious unorganized and serious discipline-based learning style and the serious non-Marxist tendency in academic work. In order to further criticize the work of Comrade Lotte in bioscience Mistake, Bureau of Science, Culture and Education Commission of the State Council Bureau of Science and Technology and the Bureau of Planning of the Chinese Academy of Sciences held three bioscience forums between April and June this year. The current status of the biological sciences and a number of issues therein were also discussed, and preliminary views were exchanged for future work. Participants in these three forums included Zhu Kezhen (Chinese Academy of Sciences), Zhao Xun, Meng Qingzhe, He Qunzhe (Bureau of Planning, Culture and Education Committee of the State Council), Geng Guangbo, Chen Ren (Central Ministry of Agriculture), Zhang Jingtao, Liu Ziyuan (Peking University) (Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences), Lü Tianyu, Xu Weiying, Liang Zhenglan, Hu Huan (Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China) (Tsinghua University), Jin Chengzhong (Plant Physiology Laboratory, Chinese Academy of Sciences), Huang Zuojie and Sun Jizhong (Chinese Academy of Sciences Darwinism Research Class), Zi Zijiang, Ding Jie, Wang Zhihua, He Chengjun, Jian Zhuopo (Chinese Academy of Sciences Compilation Bureau and Planning Bureau) and others. This article is the conclusion of the previous two symposiums. At the last symposium, the above participants basically agreed with the arguments in this article. Among them, the last listed work is only a preliminary one and needs further discussion. With regard to the current state of the biological sciences, and in particular the impact of the Moorish doctrine on all aspects of the old biology, there is a need to continue systematic criticism. This article is reprinted from June 29, 1952, People’s Daily, with some changes in writing.