Translated material
Livanova mythology
At the beginning of this week, the newspaper Kommersant suddenly appeared an interview with the Minister of Education and Science Dmitry Livanov, in which he describes his attitude to the results of the Dissernet community. The minister is based on the judgments of Mr. on the common myths about the Dissernet community. Recently, more and more often you have to hear any unusual nonsense about the project on the study of the world of linden reputations. It is doubly insulting when people who seem to be rational and sane. Therefore, it seems to me that today it would be appropriate to talk about myths.
Myth No. 1. “The fact of unreasonable borrowing or even more so the fact of the lack of scientific novelty can only establish an expert in the relevant field of knowledge. And no computer analysis, no contextual search, which is used by different programs, can establish this fact. Therefore, any conclusion can only be expert, must be performed by qualified people, specialists in the relevant field of science. The results that Dissernet gives out do not satisfy this requirement. ”
Before all other experts, Dissernet experts have one very important advantage-the right to independently choose a text for analysis for borrowing. Like any practical person collects fruits primarily from the lower branches of a fruit tree, and the “disserter” chooses the most mature texts for his work to work, in which these borrowings stretch with a continuous continuous ribbon literally from the first and to the last page. Such whole manuscripts in the latest history of the scientist Russia at least ship wagons. Is it necessary in this case to understand thoroughly in any sciences, is it not enough to have an elementary skill to distinguish the letters on paper? Nevertheless, the minister talks about some mysterious scientific novelty, which is given only to a specialist. All this demagogy is good only as a barren theory. In practice, often the dissertations say about the scientific novelty, the authors of which also stole the conclusions of “their” scientific research from the first and to the last letter.
Myth No. 2. “And a very important thing - on their site they post only negative results. And a person who is not immersed in this problem at all, it seems that all scientists are crooks and deceivers. A person who is not professionally busy with science sees these thousands of examinations on their website and asks: do we have any candidate and doctor of sciences such a crook? ”
In this matter, Mr. The Minister showed incompetence. Firstly, it is fundamentally impossible to prove the non-existence of something in an open, unmarked system. Namely, this is what the minister advises us to bother with Mr.. The search for plagiarism can never be considered complete. Such is such an ephemeral substance. There is always the possibility that new circumstances will open or there is a new, previously unknown source of borrowing. For this reason, the value of a positive conclusion is very doubtful. Exactly in the same vein, Western colleagues who are engaged in the exposures of false scientists, for example, in Germany, understand this problem. In Russia, on the contrary, they once again invent their bicycle. In many universities (hello to the same minister), the norm is introduced today, together with the text of their scientific work, the certificate of the Anti-Plagiath program is a kind of remission of sins. No remission of sins from the Dissernet community is expected. But the creation of a single register of real scientists in the plans is listed. This register, in fact, is already being created. Didn't you notice? Secondly, with the same success, one can blame the courts of creating the illusion “all kinds of crooks and rapists around”, and the campaign of Alexei Navalny to combat corruption-an action of intimidation of the population by the ubiquitous corrupt officials.
Myth No. 3. “At first, the statute of limitations was ten years, then it was reduced to three, and now, in December 2013, we raised to ten again. But lawyers told us that a normative act cannot be worsened by a person’s position. ” We are talking about amnesty to all false scientists who have expired these three years since defending the dissertation.
In fact, these rules were invented by the crafty officials of the ministry for themselves. At the same time, they rudely “violated the fundamental principle of civil relations, consisting in the fact that no one can benefit from their unfair behavior. But this is the case with those who received a degree, presenting someone else's work under their name. Indeed, after the statute of limitations, these persons can not only not worry about the possible deprivation of unreasonably received degree, but also demand the protection of their “copyright” rights. ” This is stated in the open letter of the community of scientists.
Myth No. 4. "After all, they check not so much scientists as politicians and businessmen."
The dissertation is so arranged that the first stage of the audit is carried out by a constantly working program, which is tiredly grinding hundreds of dissertations per day, seven days a week, giving out to the mountain those that recorded large-scale coincidence with other work. All such cases are subsequently versed in experts for manual reconciliation and ultimately fall on one common warehouse of linden dissertations. Some, the most impressive examples of scientific theft fall further on the site of the community. But even here, political interests do not prevail. By the way, the latest masters of the Pipaist method - by the profession of a painter and a priest. And before that there were a number of rectors of large universities. The media give political coloring the results of the “disserternet”, selecting it “customers” according to their understanding and the current situation. Moreover, now in the Dissernet community there is a total check of dissertations, without division into officials or politicians. This is not necessary in order to convict some Vasya Pupkin in violation of academic ethics, but in order to identify patterns in the work of the Pupkin Pupil system. Basically, thanks to these Pupkin, and not to “politicians and businessmen”, “Dissernet” became the owner of a unique database that allows to visualize the entire institute of fake production in the country.
Myth No. 5. “And why do they not check the dissertations in physics, mathematics, biology ...”
Check. For example, all the dissertations of members of the Russian Academy of Sciences were checked. Yes, just the one that your officials zealously undertook to reform at their discretion. Among the authors of these dissertations, physicists, mathematicians and biologists prevail. It's hard to believe! Not a single obvious fake has yet been found.
Myth No. 6. “By and large, if the businessman bought a dissertation, then he came to the dissent, paid money, read something on a piece of paper and received a degree-in this case he did not violate scientific ethics, because he is not a scientist.”
Here Mr. The Minister, frankly, was serving. After all, this ministry with his own handles gives such a businessman a certificate (diploma) of a state model confirming that he, a businessman, is none other than a scientist. And how many such “scientists”, thanks to such “diplomas”, were the warm places of rector and deans, became professors and associate professors? Those. Mr., the minister himself first provided them with Xiva, appointed them to senior positions, announced forgiveness to them, and now Kommersant’s journalist hangs noodles on his ears, they say, they were not scientists at all, but they stood nearby. At the same time, the Minister of Education complains of "serious reputational problems for Russian science as a whole." This is about the same as crookedly blame the mirror.
In conclusion, I will share a terrible secret that has recently become the property of the Dissernet community. At the very end of last year, Mr. The Minister approved by his order the composition of the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission. As it turned out, the councils of the newly elected “experts” of the Higher Attestation Commission in the scientific areas fundamentally important for the country were literally stuffed with professional dissurores, authoritative representatives of the most productive factories of the fractions. It is these “specialists” that Mr. Minister means that they and only they have the right to judge the quality of dissertation, their scientific value and significance. We will talk about this scandalous phenomenon in detail. Stay with the Disseernet. It won't be boring.