陈俊元
中央美术学院 研究生院 在地化设计研究方向（ 城市设计学院下属专业 ）
联系方式：[email protected]
摘要
在复杂性科学与系统思维的框架下，本文回溯 “wicked problems” 的谱系（ Churchman, 1967；Rittel & Webber, 1973 ），并评析其进入中文后的多种译名（ “棘手 / 坏 / 复杂 / 抗解问题” ）。我们指出，这些译法分别偏重紧迫性、道德评判、词义歧义或技术障碍，未能充分涵盖该概念的核心属性：多方利益冲突、目标不定、路径不可复现、无停止规则与无决定性检验。为此，本文提出译名 “顽痼问题”，以 “顽” 显难驯与抗治理之性，以 “痼” 指久病入络、根深难治，并借中文 “问题” （ 既指 problem 亦指 question ）的语义双歧，凸显 “理解—应对” 之同步性。本文进一步以中医整体观作喻，阐明顽痼问题的系统耦合与表里失衡，并重述其十项性质以供诊断与研判。结论部分提出对公共治理、城市规划与设计教育的启示：与其追求一次性解法，不如发展跨学科协作、实验性学习与反身性评估的能力。
关键词： 顽痼问题；棘手问题；复杂性；系统思维；公共治理；翻译学
https://doi.org/10.64053/HVEN5823
编者按
子曰：名不正则言不顺。
在活着的语言中，汉语是古老的；在使用人口累计上，汉语是最多的；作为第一语言，汉语仍然是最大的。
于今，汉语内外交困，左右为难。内部受制于严格管控的言论自由，外部承受英语的世界霸权，左边是教育体系批量生产的标准化人群，右边是庸俗乃至猥琐的自媒体风格。
《 汉语学志 》强调简洁、优美、准确、诚实的语言文字，故此，特设 “推敲专栏”，引《 苦吟 》（ 卢延让 ）诗为态度。
莫话诗中事，诗中难更无。
吟安一个字，捻断数茎须。
险觅天应闷，狂搜海亦枯。
不同文赋易，为著者之乎。
又有贾岛《题诗后》为旨趣。
两句三年得，一吟双泪流。知音如不赏，归卧故山秋。
Wicked Problem-顽痼问题
1. 引言
20 世纪 70 年代末至 90 年代初，学术界经历了一场对既有科学范式的深刻反思。研究者开始质疑过去那种将复杂现象拆解为独立变量，再通过机械原理对其加以控制的思维方式。特别是以系统思维（ systems thinking ）与复杂性理论 （ complexity theory ）为代表的一系列跨学科方法逐渐兴起。此时期，被誉为现代系统科学之父的卡尔·路德维希·冯·贝塔朗菲（ Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy ）于 1968年 提出了 “通用系统理论” （ General System Theory ），为后来的复杂性研究奠定了理论基础 ( Bertalanffy, 1968 )；法国哲学家埃德加·莫兰（ Edgar Morin ）自 1977 年起陆续出版六卷本著作《 方法 》（ La Méthode ），从理论、方法与实践层面全面阐述了复杂性思想对社会伦理与知识组织方式的深远意义。在美国，新成立的圣塔菲研究所（ Santa Fe Institute, 1984 ）更推动了 “复杂适应系统” （ Complex Adaptive Systems ）等理论的发展，将非线性、自组织、涌现性（ emergence ）等概念引入主流科学讨论。
正是在对 “理性规划范式” 的反思背景下，加州大学伯克利分校教授霍斯特·里特尔（ Horst W. J. Rittel ）提出了 “wicked problems” 一词，用以描述那些难以界定、缺乏标准解法、问题与解法纠缠不清的社会难题。该术语首次由哲学家 C. West Churchman 在其 1967 年发表于《 管理科学 》的社论中引入，指出这是他从里特尔处听到的一个极具启发性的概念，揭示了社会问题的非工程性本质 ( “Free for All,” 1967 )。1973 年里特尔与城市规划学者 梅尔文·韦伯（ Melvin Webber ）合著《 规划一般理论的困境 》一文，正式发表了 “Wicked Problem” 一词，并总结出其 “十条特征” ( Rittel & Webber, 1973 ) 。作为 “无法分割或简化的问题” 的顽痼问题，必须通过整体视角和复杂系统的理论方法对其加以理解。
2. 该术语已有汉译的讨论
“Wicked Problem” 一词自 2005 年进入中国学术界以来 ( 唐林涛, 2005 )，已有多种翻译方式，包括 “坏问题” ( 唐林涛, 2005 )、“棘手问题” ( 周昕宇 & 杨宏山, 2025; 王敏 & 宋轶, 2023; 郭佳良, 2017, 2020 )、“复杂问题 ( 郭巍青 et al., 2019 )” 和 “抗解问题 ( 张金梁 & 王晓峰, 2024 )” 等。然而，这些译法均未能全面体现其内涵和特性。通过对不同译法的横向比较，本文提出了一种新的译法 —— “顽痼问题”，以更贴切地反映其核心特质。
棘手：紧急但不一定复杂
“Wicked Problem” 最普遍的翻译为 “棘手问题” ( 周昕宇 & 杨宏山, 2025; 王敏 & 宋轶, 2023; 郭佳良, 2017, 2020 )，这一译法在中文学术界尤为普遍。其突出问题的紧迫性和急需解决的特质，但却忽略了该类问题的内在复杂性和难以根本解决的特点。实际上，“棘手” 更多强调解决问题的操作层面，而非其系统性难题的本质。
坏：价值判断但无特点描述
另一种较为直译的译法是 “坏问题” ( 唐林涛, 2005 )，直接沿用了 “Wicked” 的字面含义。然而，这一译法容易让人误以为问题带有道德或价值层面的评判性意义，从而模糊了 “Wicked Problem” 作为技术性与实践性术语的真正意涵。这种译法虽然抓人眼球，但无法满足严谨的学术讨论需求。
复杂：片面的特点描述
“复杂问题” ( 郭巍青 et al., 2019 ) 是 “Wicked Problem” 在中文中的另一常见译法。虽然这一译法试图呈现问题的多维复杂性，却因中文语境中 “复杂” 一词的多义性而显得模糊。具体来说，“复杂” 既可以指 “复杂性” （ complexity ），即难以通过单一方法解决的特质；也可能指 “繁杂” （ complicated ），后者通常可以通过梳理与分析得以化解。这种模糊性可能会削弱读者对 “Wicked Problem” 核心特征的理解。
抗解：仅突出技术维度
“抗解问题” ( 张金梁 & 王晓峰, 2024 ) 从字面上可理解为 “抗拒解决的问题”，一定程度上对应了 “Wicked Problem” 中难以通过标准化方法加以解决的特性。然而，该译法在表达中更侧重 “解法” 的抗拒，突出了技术性障碍，却未能充分涵盖 “Wicked Problem” 所具有的多方利益冲突、目标模糊、解决路径不可复现等实践性特征。
3. 为何译作 “顽痼问题”
基于上文已有汉译的讨论，笔者主张将 “Wicked Problem” 翻译为 “顽痼问题”。下文将对 “顽”、“痼” 和 “问题” 三个部分分别进行阐述。
3.1. “顽“
首先 “顽” 字，在中文语境里带有一种抗拒性。在《 说文解字 》中，“顽” 本义为 “愚也”，后发展为 “顽钝、顽劣、顽皮、顽抗” 等用法，常用来形容不受教、不服从、难以约束的行为或状态。这使得 “顽” 带有一种 “抵抗治理“ 的倾向，即包含理性难以控制之处，也隐含了某种情感上的叛逆。
在这个意义上，它与 wicked 一词之间产生了一种有趣的语义共鸣 —— wicked 并非单纯的 “邪恶” 或 “错误”，而是指一种难以驯服的问题状态。这正好与里特尔在其文章中用 “驯服问题” （ tame problem ）来表达可以被解决的简单问题相互呼应 ( Rittel & Webber, 1973 )。
3.2. “痼”
虽然 “顽” 可以表达 wicked 的 “难以被驯服” 的意思，但 “顽问题” 在中文表达中并不通顺。因此，“顽痼” 这一翻译笔者希望取 “顽固” 之音与 “痼疾” 之形。由 “固” 到 “痼” 的变化灵感来自于中医。
系统思维强调问题是嵌入在其所在的复杂系统中的，要真正理解并应对这些问题，必须从整体的角度出发，分析问题的多维交织关系。与传统的线性思维不同，系统性思维能够发现表面上看似无关的要素之间的间接联系，揭示任何一个变量的变化如何影响整个系统。这一思维模式与中医的整体观念有许多相似之处。中医强调人体是一个有机的整体，各个部分相互依存，治疗疾病不能仅仅针对某一症状，而应从整体出发，调整全身的功能以达到平衡。例如，中医常通过刺激脚部的穴位来缓解远处器官的病痛，这种思路与系统思维下的全局观不谋而合。
《 说文解字 》段玉裁注本在 “疒部” 中释曰：“痼，久病也”，即指积久难愈之病，强调其病程之长与根深难治的特性 ( 许慎撰 et al., 1963 )。在古典文学中，“痼” 常与 “疾” 连用为 “痼疾”，专指长期积累、反复发作、难以彻底治愈的慢性疾病。
在古代医籍中，“痼疾” 多用于描述长期潜伏、难以消除的病理状态。《 难经·十八难 》即有相关记载：“假令脉结伏者，内无积聚；脉浮结者，外无痼疾；有积聚脉不结伏，有痼疾脉不浮结。为脉不应病，病不应脉，是为死病也。( 秦越人, 2009 )” 中医认为，这种脉象和病情互相矛盾的情况，说明身体已经失去正常反应能力，往往预示着病情危重、难以治愈，所以称之为 “死病”。简单来说，就像手机电池明明没电了电量却显示满格，或者明明有电却黑屏关机，这种 “表里不一” 的状态往往意味着系统出了大问题。此处 “痼疾” 不仅强调疾病的时间跨度，更通过表象与系统之间的关系体现了其复杂性。
因此，将 “wicked” 译为 “顽痼”，不仅在语义上呈现出问题的顽劣性与慢性根深之象，也在思维模式上契合了中医对复杂病理状态 “久病入络、系统失衡” 的整体性认知。
3.3 “问题” 的双重语意
在中文语境中，“问题” 一词天然具有语义上的双重性：它既可以对应英文中的 problem，即需要解决的难题，也可以对应 question，即需要理解与探究的提问。然而在英文中，problem 与 question 通常被严格区分。Problem 通常指涉一种障碍或困境，隐含着 “必须被解决” 的语气，即便像 wicked problem 这样无法彻底解决的复杂难题，其命名本身也无法避免想要解决它的联想。而中文中的 “问题” 则不同，它的语义更为开放，允许人们在理解尚未清晰、边界尚不明确时，也将某种现象称为 “问题”，提供了一种更温和、更探询的视角：面对顽痼问题，我们未必要急于将其视为迫切待解的 “难题”，而是可以先对它进行 “提问”，它尚未被充分理解，也许仅仅是我们的知识经验尚无法对其进行认知。
正如顽痼问题的提出者里特尔与韦伯 ( Rittel & Webber, 1973 ) 所指出的，理解问题与开发应对方案是同步发生的过程，也就是说，所谓 “应对”，本身就是 “理解” 的一部分。中文“问题”一词在语义上的可置换性，恰好为这种同步性提供了语言基础。它不仅避免了将复杂现象简单归类为 “待解难题” 的倾向，也鼓励研究者以更开放的姿态面对这类问题的独特性，从而放下固有的模式与预设。从该角度来看，“顽痼问题” 不仅是对 wicked problem 的一种翻译选择，更是在中文语境中对这一概念的深入表达。
4. ⸻ 总结
现实世界中诸多问题并没有简单明确的答案，任何单一解决方案，往往都带来新的社会或环境后果。顽痼问题的存在提醒我们，教育不应仅限于让学生记忆固定的标准答案，而应培养他们理解和应对这些问题的能力。面对日益复杂和多元的社会生态挑战，培养跨学科视野、系统思考能力可能比掌握具体知识更为关键。
5. 参考文献
Bertalanffy, L. von. (1968). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. Braziller.
Free for All. (1967). Management Science, 14(4), B-141-B-146.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.14.4.B141
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01405730
周昕宇 & 杨宏山. ( 2025 ). 棘手问题何以应对：基于试验学习的理论解释 —— 以北京市 “接诉即办” 改革为例. 求实, 1, 46–59, 110–111.
唐林涛. ( 2005 ). 设计事理学理论、方法与实践 [博士学位论文, 清华大学].
https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?dbcode=CDFD&dbname=CDFD9908&filename=2005036547.nh
张金梁 & 王晓峰. (2024). 分布式系统视域下社会创新设计中抗解问题研究. 家具与室内装饰, 31(10), 91–96.
https://doi.org/10.16771/j.cn43-1247/ts.2024.10.015
王敏 & 宋轶. (2023). 设计中的困顿：霍斯特·里特尔“棘手问题”的缘起、定义与再认识. 装饰, 7, 101–107.
https://doi.org/10.16272/j.cnki.cn11-1392/j.2023.07.016
秦越人. ( 2009 ). 难经校释 ( 南京中医学院注解, Trans. ). 人民卫生出版社.
https://book.douban.com/subject/3414716/
许慎撰, 徐铉杨校定, & 许慎. ( 1963 ). 说文解字：中华书局影印. 中华书局.
https://book.douban.com/subject/1032967/
郭佳良. ( 2017 ). 应对 “棘手问题” :公共价值管理范式的源起及其方法论特征. 中国行政管理, 11, 111–117.
郭佳良. ( 2020 ). 公共行政中的 “烫手山芋”—— 基于 “棘手问题” 缘起、内涵与应对策略的研究述评. 公共行政评论, 13(4), 185-203+211-212.
郭巍青, 张文杰, & 陈晓运. ( 2019 ). “复杂问题” 与基层干部的 “办法” :以N区 “外嫁女” 问题为例. 公共行政评论, 12(3), 70–84, 191.
(1) 顽痼问题没有确定的表述方式。
(2) 顽痼问题没有停止的规则。
(3) 顽痼问题的解决方案不是真或假,而是好或坏。
(4) 解决顽痼问题的方案没有直接和最终的检验标准。
(5) 顽痼问题的每一个解决方案都是 ‘一锤子买卖’ ;因为没有机会通过试错来学习 ,所以每一次尝试都非常重要。
(6) ‘顽痼’ 的问题并没有一套可列举的 ( 或可详尽描述的 ) 潜在解决方案,也没 有一套可纳入计划的可允许操作的详尽描述。
(7) 每个顽痼问题本质上都是独一无二的。
(8) 每个顽痼问题都可以被视为另一个问题的症状。
(9) 代表顽痼问题的差异的存在可以有多种解释方式。解释方式的选择决定了问 题解决方案的性质。
（10）规划者没有权利犯错。
<全文完>
Wicked Problem—顽痼问题 (Wángù Wèntí)
Chen Junyuan
Graduate School, Central Academy of Fine Arts
Research Direction in Localized Design (under the School of Urban Design)
Contact: [email protected]
Abstract：Situated within complexity science and systems thinking, this article reconstructs the genealogy of “wicked problems” (Churchman, 1967; Rittel & Webber, 1973 ) and evaluates the competing Chinese renderings that have circulated since 2005 (“thorny,” “bad,” “complex,” and “resistant-to-solution” problems). We argue these translations overemphasize urgency, moral valence, lexical ambiguity, or technical impediments while missing defining attributes of wickedness: cross-stakeholder conflict, indeterminate goals, non-replicable solution paths, and the absence of stopping rules and decisive tests. We therefore propose wángù wèntí ( 顽痼问题 ) as a more faithful and generative rendering: 顽 signals untameability and resistance to governance; 痼 evokes chronic, deep-rooted conditions; and the semantic duality of 问题 ( problem/question ) foregrounds the simultaneity of understanding and response. Using Traditional Chinese Medicine’s holism as an analogy, we clarify system-level coupling and surface–system mismatches, and we restate the classic ten properties for diagnostic use. We conclude with implications for public governance, urban planning, and design education: prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration, experimental learning, and reflexive evaluation over one-shot solutions.
Keywords: wicked problems; 顽痼问题; complexity; systems thinking; public governance; translation studies
https://doi.org/10.64053/HVEN5823
Editor’s Note
Confucius said: Ming bu zheng ze yan bu shun. (If names are not correct, language will not be in accordance with the truth of things.)
Among living languages, Chinese is ancient. It is the most spoken language in the world, with the largest number of native speakers.
Today, the Chinese language is besieged from within and without, caught in a dilemma. Within China, it is constrained by strictly controlled freedom of speech; externally, it faces the global hegemony of English. It is surrounded on one side by rigid mental frameworks mass-produced by the education system, and on the other side by the vulgar, crude pontifications of self-media .
The Chinese Language Journal emphasizes language that is concise, elegant, precise, and truthful. For this reason, we have established the “Deliberation Column” (Tuiqiao Zhuanlan), in the spirit of Lu Yanrang’s “Musing on a Poem” .
Speak not of matters within the poem, for in the poem, there are no greater difficulties.
To settle on one word, I’ve twisted off several strands of my beard.
Seeking a perilous phrase would weary Heaven; a frantic search would dry up the sea.
Unlike the ease of prose, this is the author’s toil with particles of speech.
We also take guidance from Jia Dao’s “After Writing a Poem” .
Two lines took me three years to write; when I recite them, my tears flow.
If a kindred spirit does not appreciate them, I will return to my old mountain to sleep through the autumn.
________________________________________
1. Introduction
From the late 1970s to the early 1990s, academia underwent a profound reflection on existing scientific paradigms. Researchers began to question the past way of thinking that dismantled complex phenomena into independent variables and then sought to control them through mechanical principles. In particular, a series of interdisciplinary methods represented by systems thinking and complexity theory gradually emerged. During this period, Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy, hailed as the father of modern systems science, proposed the “General System Theory” in 1968, laying the theoretical foundation for later complexity studies (Bertalanffy, 1968). French philosopher Edgar Morin, beginning in 1977, successively published his six-volume work La Méthode, comprehensively elaborating on the profound significance of complexity thinking for social ethics and the organization of knowledge. In the United States, the newly established Santa Fe Institute (1984) further promoted the development of theories such as “Complex Adaptive Systems,” introducing concepts like non-linearity, self-organization, and emergence into mainstream scientific discourse.
It was against this backdrop of reflection on the “rational planning paradigm” that University of California, Berkeley professor Horst W. J. Rittel coined the term “wicked problems” to describe social predicaments that are difficult to define, lack standard solutions, and in which the problem and solution are inextricably entangled. The term was first introduced by philosopher C. West Churchman in his 1967 editorial in Management Science, where he noted it was a highly inspiring concept he had heard from Rittel, revealing the non-engineering nature of social problems (“Free for All,” 1967). In 1973, Rittel and urban planning scholar Melvin Webber co-authored the article “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning,” officially publishing the term “Wicked Problem” and summarizing its “ten characteristics” (Rittel & Webber, 1973).[1] As problems that “cannot be divided or simplified,” wicked problems must be understood through a holistic perspective and the theoretical methods of complex systems.
2. Discussion of Existing Chinese Translations of the Term
Since the term “Wicked Problem” entered Chinese academia in 2005 ( Tang Lintao, 2005 ), it has been translated in several ways, including “坏问题” ( huài wèntí, bad problem ) ( Tang Lintao, 2005 ), “棘手问题” ( jíshǒu wèntí, thorny problem ) (Zhou & Yang, 2025; Wang & Song, 2023; Guo, 2017, 2020), “复杂问题” (fùzá wèntí, complex problem) (Guo et al., 2019), and “抗解问题” (kàngjiě wèntí, resistant-to-solution problem) (Zhang & Wang, 2024). However, none of these translations fully capture its connotation and characteristics. Through a horizontal comparison of these different translations, this article proposes a new translation—”顽痼问题” (wángù wèntí)—to more accurately reflect its core qualities.
Thorny (棘手): Urgent but Not Necessarily Complex
The most common translation for “Wicked Problem” is “棘手问题” (jíshǒu wèntí, thorny problem) (Zhou & Yang, 2025; Wang & Song, 2023; Guo, 2017, 2020), which is particularly prevalent in Chinese academia. It highlights the urgency of the problem and the need for a solution, but it overlooks the inherent complexity and the characteristic of being difficult to resolve fundamentally. In reality, “棘手” (thorny) emphasizes the operational level of problem-solving rather than the essence of it being a systemic predicament.
Bad (坏): A Value Judgment Lacking Description
Another more literal translation is “坏问题” (huài wèntí, bad problem) (Tang Lintao, 2005), which directly adopts the literal meaning of “wicked.” However, this translation can easily lead one to mistakenly believe that the problem carries a moral or value-based judgment, thus blurring the true meaning of “Wicked Problem” as a technical and practical term. While eye-catching, this translation fails to meet the needs of rigorous academic discussion.
Complex (复杂): A One-Sided Description
“复杂问题” (fùzá wèntí, complex problem) (Guo et al., 2019) is another common translation for “Wicked Problem” in Chinese. Although this translation attempts to present the multidimensional complexity of the problem, it becomes ambiguous due to the polysemy of the word “复杂” (complex) in the Chinese language . Specifically, “复杂” can refer to “complexity,” a quality that is difficult to solve with a single method, or it can refer to being “complicated,” which can usually be resolved through sorting and analysis. This ambiguity may weaken the reader’s understanding of the core characteristics of a “Wicked Problem.”
Resistant-to-Solution ( 抗解 ): Highlighting Only the Technical Dimension
“抗解问题” (kàngjiě wèntí, resistant-to-solution problem) can be literally understood as “a problem that resists being solved,” which to some extent corresponds to the difficulty of solving a “Wicked Problem” with standardized methods. However, this translation places more emphasis on the resistance to a “solution,” highlighting technical obstacles, and fails to fully encompass the practical features of a “Wicked Problem,” such as conflicts of interest among multiple parties, ambiguous goals, and the non-replicable nature of solution paths.
3. Why Translate it as “顽痼问题” (Wángù Wèntí)?
Based on the discussion of the existing Chinese translations above, this author advocates for translating “Wicked Problem” as “顽痼问题” (wángù wèntí). The following will elaborate on the three parts: “顽” (wán), “痼” (gù), and “问题” (wèntí).
3.1. “顽” (wán)
First, the character “顽” (wán), in the Chinese context, carries a sense of resistance. In the Shuowen Jiezi (the oldest comprehensive Chinese character dictionary, compiled during the Eastern Han dynasty ), the original meaning of “顽” is “foolish,” which later evolved into usages like “顽钝” (stubborn and dull), “顽劣” (unruly and wicked), “顽皮” (naughty), and “顽抗” (stubborn resistance), often used to describe behavior or a state that is incorrigible, disobedient, and difficult to restrain. This gives “顽” a flavor of “resisting governance,” implying a nature that is averse to control and reason, as well as a certain emotional rebellion.
In this sense, it creates an interesting semantic resonance with the word “wicked”—wicked is not simply “evil” or “wrong,” but refers to a problem state that is difficult to tame. This corresponds well with Rittel’s use of “tame problem” in his article to describe simple problems that can be solved (Rittel & Webber, 1973).
3.2. “痼” (gù)
Although “顽” can express the “difficult to tame” meaning of “wicked,” the phrase “顽问题” (wán wèntí) does not flow easily in Chinese. Therefore, for the translation “顽痼,” this author hopes to borrow the sound of “顽固” (wángù, stubborn) and the form of “痼疾” (gùjí, chronic disease). The inspiration for the change from “固” to “痼” comes from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM).
Systems thinking emphasizes that problems are embedded in the complex systems in which they exist. To truly understand and respond to these problems, one must start from a holistic perspective, analyzing the multidimensional and intertwined relationships of the problem. Unlike traditional linear thinking, systems thinking can discover the indirect connections between seemingly unrelated elements, revealing how a change in any one variable affects the entire system. This mode of thinking shares many similarities with the holistic concept of TCM. TCM considers the human body as an organic whole, with all parts interdependent. When t reating a disease, a TCM practitioner does not simply target a single symptom but starts from the whole, adjusting the functions of the entire body to achieve balance. For example, TCM often stimulates acupoints on the feet to alleviate pain in various organs, a line of thought that coincides with the global view of systems thinking.
In Duan Yucai’s annotated edition of the Shuowen Jiezi, under the “sickness radical” (疒), he notes : “痼, a long-standing illness,” referring to a disease that has persisted over a long period of time and is difficult to cure, emphasizing the length of its course and its deep-rooted, intractable nature (Xu Shen et al., 1963). In classical literature, “痼” is often combined with “疾” (jí, illness) to form “痼疾” (gùjí), specifically referring to chronic diseases that have accumulated over a long period, recur frequently, and are difficult to cure completely.
In ancient medical texts, “痼疾” is often used to describe a pathological state that is long-latent and difficult to eliminate. The Nanjing (an ancient foundational text of TCM ) describes this confounding state in its eighteenth chapter : “If the pulse is knotted and hidden, there are no internal accumulations; if the pulse is floating and knotted, there is no external chronic disease. If there are accumulations but the pulse is not knotted and hidden, or if there is a chronic disease but the pulse is not floating and knotted, this is a case where the pulse does not correspond to the illness, and the illness does not correspond to the pulse. This is a fatal illness.” (Qin Yueren, 2009). According to TCM, this kind of contradiction between the pulse and the illness indicates that the body has lost its normal ability to respond, often presaging a critical and incurable condition, thus dubbed a “fatal illness.” It is akin to a mobile phone battery displaying a full charge when it is actually dead, or displaying a black screen and shutting down when it is fully charged. This state of “the outside not matching the inside” often means there is a major problem with the system. Here, “痼疾” not only emphasizes the time span of the disease but also reflects its complexity through the relationship between appearance and the system.
Therefore, translating “wicked” as “顽痼” (wángù) not only reflects the stubbornness and chronic, deep-rooted nature of the problem from a semantic perspective, but also aligns, in its mental framework, with the holistic understanding in TCM of a complex pathological state as a “long illness that has entered the collaterals, a system out of balance.”
3.3 The Dual Meaning of “问题” (wèntí)
In the Chinese context, the word “问题” (wèntí) naturally has a semantic duality: it can be translated as the English word “problem,” a difficult issue that needs to be solved, as well as “question,” an inquiry that needs to be understood and explored. However, in English, “problem” and “question” are usually strictly distinguished. “Problem” usually refers to an obstacle or a predicament, implying an expectation that it needs to be solved. Even for a complex predicament like a wicked problem, which cannot be completely solved, that air of expectation hangs heavy over the word. In contrast, the Chinese word “问题” is different; its semantics are more open, allowing people to call a phenomenon a “问题” even when they have not yet clearly understood it or defined its boundaries. This provides a gentler, more inquisitive perspective: when faced with a wicked-chronic problem, we do not necessarily have to rush to see it as a “predicament” to be solved urgently, but can first make inquiries of it. It has not yet been fully understood; perhaps it is simply that our knowledge and experience are not yet able to grasp it.
As Rittel and Webber (1973), the scholars who coined the term “wicked problem ,” pointed out, understanding the problem and developing a response happen concurrently. That is to say, the so-called “response” is itself a part of “understanding.” The semantic interchangeability of the Chinese word “问题” happens to provide the linguistic basis for this concurrency. It not only avoids the tendency to simply classify complex phenomena as “problems to be solved” but also encourages researchers to face the uniqueness of such problems with a more open attitude, thereby letting go of fixed models and preconceptions. From this perspective, “顽痼问题” (wángù wèntí) is not just a translation choice for “wicked problem,” but a deeper expression of this concept in the Chinese context.
4. Conclusion
Many problems in the real world do not have simple, clear answers. Any single solution on its own often brings about new social or environmental consequences. The existence of “顽痼问题” (wángù wèntí) reminds us that education should not be limited to memorization of fixed, standard answers, but should cultivate an ability to understand and respond to these problems. In the face of increasingly complex and diverse socio-ecological challenges, cultivating an interdisciplinary perspective and the ability to think systemically may be more crucial than mastering specific knowledge.
5. References
[Formatted as in the original]
________________________________________
Footnote
[1] (1) Wicked problems have no definitive formulation.
(2) Wicked problems have no stopping rule.
(3) Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but good-or-bad.
(4) There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.
(5) Every solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot operation”; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error, every attempt counts significantly.
(6) Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan.
(7) Every wicked problem is essentially unique.
(8) Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.
(9) The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem’s resolution.
(10) The planner has no right to be wrong.
