04 — DIALOGUE

Thinking with Others

Philosophy grows through conversation as well as solitary reflection. Through building platforms, organizing forums, and speaking with researchers, I explore how dialogue can challenge assumptions and connect abstract questions with lived realities.

01

BUILDING DIALOGUE

SHP — Science, Humanity, and Policy

D.01

SHP — Science, Humanity, and Policy

Co-founder · Philosophy & Neuroscience Lead · Foshan Regional Coordinator

SHP is a youth-led interdisciplinary platform where students turn questions about science, technology, and society into research, writing, and public discussion. As a co-founder, I led the Philosophy and Neuroscience divisions, coordinated the Foshan regional section, contributed to editorial work, and helped design and develop the website.

Through SHP, I began to see philosophy not only as individual reflection, but also as the work of creating spaces where different perspectives can meet and productive disagreement can take place.

Visit SHP ↗
D.02

NOESIS — China's first-ever high school Online Philosophy Symposium

Co-founder · Philosophy Symposium

Theme of the Season — The Veil of Ignorance

Guiding Question: Is access to truth beneficial for ordinary people?

Knowledge is often associated with freedom and progress. Yet encountering the truth may also bring uncertainty, responsibility, or consequences that an individual has little power to change. This season of Noesis invited high school students to examine whether truth is always beneficial, who controls access to knowledge, and whether withholding information can ever be justified. By focusing on ordinary people, the symposium connected epistemological questions with power, responsibility, and everyday life.

Symposium Poster
D.03

"What Is Medicine For?" — Longevity, AI, and the Meaning of Human Improvement

Selected Speaker · Science, Technology & Society · Conversation with Professor Zhongchi Li

Professor Li discussed how artificial intelligence is changing research on metabolism, aging, and cancer. Rather than treating unlimited longevity as the goal of medicine, he emphasized extending the period in which people can remain healthy and independent. This distinction led me to ask:

If medicine seeks to improve human life, who determines what counts as an improvement? Could biomedical technologies eventually change not only our bodies, but also how we understand what it means to be human?

Professor Li redirected my speculative question toward scientific feasibility and the concrete problems researchers are currently trying to solve. Our exchange taught me that philosophy of technology must remain grounded in scientific constraints and real human needs—while continuing to question the values guiding technological development.

04

PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS

Four questions at the intersection of medicine, technology, and human values

Q1

Longevity vs. Quality of Life

Should medicine aim to extend biological lifespan, or to improve health, independence, and meaning within a finite life? This question asks what truly counts as medical progress.

Q2

Treatment vs. Enhancement

When does restoring health become redesigning human ability? The boundary between treatment and enhancement raises questions about normality, autonomy, identity, and equal access to technology.

Q3

Prediction vs. Judgment

AI can identify patterns and predict possible outcomes, but it cannot independently decide which questions deserve attention or which risks are acceptable. Scientific prediction still requires human judgment and responsibility.

Q4

Biology vs. Social Justice

Health differences may appear biologically, yet they can be shaped by pollution, nutrition, working conditions, and access to healthcare. How can research explain biological variation without naturalizing social inequality?