t****r 发帖数: 1506 | 1 神奇啊,各种神奇
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2011/01
"哥伦比亚大学统计学教授 Andrew Gelman 在他的网志中称,他的统计学图书《数据
回归分析和多级层次模型》(Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/
Hierarchical Models)在中国的出版商人民邮电出版社通知,因为书中含有若干政治
敏感材料,无法继续出版此书。此教材的中文版出版计划被迫取消。Andrew Gelman表
示他有一种颠覆的感觉,回忆起以前在基督教主日学中听说访问苏联时必须将圣经夹带
在行李中,因为当地没有信仰自由。 Andrew Gelman 还说哈佛大学统计系主任孟晓犁
曾告诉他,中国以前还一度禁止教授贝叶斯统计学,因为先验概率的概念与共产主义理
念相悖(“先验”代表了传统的旧思想,必须被砸烂)。" |
i*********8 发帖数: 3229 | 2 这个就是张嘴就喷的。
“中国以前还一度禁止教授贝叶斯统计学,因为先验概率的概念与共产主义理念相悖(
“先验”代表了传统的旧思想,必须被砸烂)”
【在 t****r 的大作中提到】 : 神奇啊,各种神奇 : http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2011/01 : "哥伦比亚大学统计学教授 Andrew Gelman 在他的网志中称,他的统计学图书《数据 : 回归分析和多级层次模型》(Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/ : Hierarchical Models)在中国的出版商人民邮电出版社通知,因为书中含有若干政治 : 敏感材料,无法继续出版此书。此教材的中文版出版计划被迫取消。Andrew Gelman表 : 示他有一种颠覆的感觉,回忆起以前在基督教主日学中听说访问苏联时必须将圣经夹带 : 在行李中,因为当地没有信仰自由。 Andrew Gelman 还说哈佛大学统计系主任孟晓犁 : 曾告诉他,中国以前还一度禁止教授贝叶斯统计学,因为先验概率的概念与共产主义理 : 念相悖(“先验”代表了传统的旧思想,必须被砸烂)。"
|
c****n 发帖数: 1646 | 3 这个是真的也不奇怪啊,
天朝当年还批判相对论,基因学说,宇宙大爆炸理论。。。。。。
【在 i*********8 的大作中提到】 : 这个就是张嘴就喷的。 : “中国以前还一度禁止教授贝叶斯统计学,因为先验概率的概念与共产主义理念相悖( : “先验”代表了传统的旧思想,必须被砸烂)”
|
l**k 发帖数: 45267 | 4 文革出啥事都不稀奇
悖(
【在 c****n 的大作中提到】 : 这个是真的也不奇怪啊, : 天朝当年还批判相对论,基因学说,宇宙大爆炸理论。。。。。。
|
p****n 发帖数: 9263 | 5 总有漏网的
文革结束十几年后俺们上梁昆淼的力学课本,序言还狂批了一顿相对论呢
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】 : 文革出啥事都不稀奇 : : 悖(
|
wy 发帖数: 14511 | 6 为啥?
【在 p****n 的大作中提到】 : 总有漏网的 : 文革结束十几年后俺们上梁昆淼的力学课本,序言还狂批了一顿相对论呢
|
p****n 发帖数: 9263 | 7 记得是因为马恩认为物质不灭总量不变,所以E=mc2就是反动了
【在 wy 的大作中提到】 : 为啥?
|
wy 发帖数: 14511 | 8 我党还有这么学术化的时候
【在 p****n 的大作中提到】 : 记得是因为马恩认为物质不灭总量不变,所以E=mc2就是反动了
|
b*****a 发帖数: 14583 | 9 物质无限可分也是写在最高指示里面的
【在 wy 的大作中提到】 : 我党还有这么学术化的时候
|
d********f 发帖数: 43471 | 10 什么叫喷?你读过文革前的中文统计书么,这是著名的公案,贝叶斯统计在苏联也是被
打倒的,是违反唯物辩证论的。所以旧的统计只教经典统计论,激进一点的还要批判以下
【在 i*********8 的大作中提到】 : 这个就是张嘴就喷的。 : “中国以前还一度禁止教授贝叶斯统计学,因为先验概率的概念与共产主义理念相悖( : “先验”代表了传统的旧思想,必须被砸烂)”
|
i******y 发帖数: 119 | 11 喜欢喷的人不必太激动,看看作者自己的update
Bayes in China update
By Andrew Gelman on January 14, 2011 8:57 PM | 12 Comments
Some clarification on the Bayes-in-China issue raised last week:
1. We heard that the Chinese publisher cited the following pages that might
contain politically objectionable materials: 3, 5, 21, 73, 112, 201.
2. It appears that, as some commenters suggested, the objection was to some
of the applications, not to the Bayesian methods.
3. Our book is not censored in China. In fact, as some commenters mentioned,
it is possible to buy it there, and it is also available in university
libraries there. The edition of the book which was canceled was intended to
be a low-cost reprint of the book. The original book is still available. I
used the phrase "Banned in China" as a joke and I apologize if it was
misinterpreted.
4. I have no quarrel with the Chinese government or with any Chinese
publishers. They can publish whatever books they would like. I found this
episode amusing only because I do not think my book on regression and
multilevel models has any strong political content. I suspect the publisher
was being unnecessarily sensitive to potentially objectionable material, but
this is their call. I thought this was an interesting story (which is why I
posted the original email on the blog) but I did not, and do not, intend it
as any sort of comment on the Chinese government, Chinese society, etc.
China is a big country and this is one person at one publisher making one
decision. That's all it is; it's not a statement about China in general.
I did not write the above out of any fear of legal action etc. I just think
it's important to be fair and clear, and it is possible that some of what I
wrote could have been misinterpreted in translation. If anyone has further
questions on this, feel free to ask in the comments and I will clarify as
best as I can. |
h*****0 发帖数: 4889 | 12 这不是学术化,是傻X,根本概念都不理解就知道按口号字面意思瞎喷。
【在 wy 的大作中提到】 : 我党还有这么学术化的时候
|
s*****m 发帖数: 8094 | 13
might
到底那些都讲啥了?轮子?
some
mentioned,
【在 i******y 的大作中提到】 : 喜欢喷的人不必太激动,看看作者自己的update : Bayes in China update : By Andrew Gelman on January 14, 2011 8:57 PM | 12 Comments : Some clarification on the Bayes-in-China issue raised last week: : 1. We heard that the Chinese publisher cited the following pages that might : contain politically objectionable materials: 3, 5, 21, 73, 112, 201. : 2. It appears that, as some commenters suggested, the objection was to some : of the applications, not to the Bayesian methods. : 3. Our book is not censored in China. In fact, as some commenters mentioned, : it is possible to buy it there, and it is also available in university
|
k*****r 发帖数: 314 | 14 都是学术,为啥不能批判,把相对论看成神圣不可侵犯那跟tg有啥区别 |