Sir

M. J. Hsu and G. Agoramoorthy argue, in Correspondence, that scientists and teachers should ignore politics (Nature 431, 627; 200410.1038/431627c), citing Taiwanese Nobel laureate Lee Yuan-tseh as an example of a scientist's unsatisfactory involvement in politics.

Lee is a highly respected scientist worldwide. This is especially true in his home country, where he has devoted himself to the welfare of the people. In his constant endeavours for Taiwanese sciences, there is not the slightest evidence that Lee has ever been biased by his political preference. It seems to us that citing a signature campaign against him is in itself a political action.

It is pervasive thinking in Taiwan that scientists should not get involved in politics under any circumstances. The main reason, pointed out by advocates of this ideology, is that expertise in science does not guarantee that scientists are masters in politics.

But who does qualify as a master of politics, in reality? Studying politics as an academic discipline is very different from practising it. Meanwhile, this position deprives scientists of their rights to participate in debating public policies.

Scientists can also make a positive contribution when engaged in the political system. They could contribute to a more environmentally friendly energy policy, for example, or security regulations that do not scare away international scholars.

In this regard, Nobel laureates who endorse the politicians they respect should be encouraged, not condemned.