August theses

On August 29-30, 2013, in Moscow, in the building of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Golden Brain will be held by the Scientific Forum, which was organized by scientists themselves, thanks to their efforts, the long discussions of the organizing committee and outside it and even financial donations of individual scientists. The TRV-hobby publishes some materials that will become the subject of discussion at the conference of scientists of the Russian Academy of Sciences “The present and future of science in Russia. Place and role of the Russian Academy of Sciences. ” Doct. physical. Sciences, chief researcher at the St. Petersburg branch of the Mathematical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, professor of St. Petersburg University Anatoly Versik presented the following theses for the conference.

Several thoughts in connection with a raider attack on a poor academy:

1. The bill of the Government of the Russian Federation on the reform of the Three Academies amazes with its courage: to encroach on the very existence of the “sacred cow”- the Academy of Sciences- who can afford this? But if we recall the series of laws that are recently adopted by the authorities, or rather the State Duma and the Federation Council, losing the last respect for sensible people, it becomes clear that this draft is in line with the laws on NGOs, “Dima Yakovlev” and others. They have a mixture of incompetence, servility, and dock. And here - what is the flight of thought: the unification of the three academies, the abolition of division into members of the worships and academicians ... What bills do we expect in the future? Associations of all religious denominations into one? Or the law on the abolition of military titles?

2. On the other hand, it is clear that there are long -harassed issues that require improve the structure, status and work of the Academy of Sciences. It is very difficult, for example, to explain to a simple person why the current (in fact, old, Soviet times) academic rules do not even allow Academics Grigory Perelman to even nominate (according to these rules, the candidate must work somewhere). Or why the scholarship to academicians for the title of academician (additional for salary!) 20 times higher than the scholarship of the graduate student of the Academy of Sciences, which has no other income at all. You can add much more.

But nevertheless, the main claim, in my opinion, is that the Academy did not develop a new concept of its existence and its work after cardinal changes in the life of the country that began in the 1980s and led to a completely different situation in the scientific world. The Academy was to use the world experience of modern scientific life much more active. This was repeatedly written.

3. However, this is not at all presented by the Academy on account by the government and the State Duma in this project, but completely different. The proof of this is the moment of the announcement of this reform. It would seem that with a recent election of the new president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, finally, hopes for its update appear. But the purpose of the authorities, it turns out, is not at all the preservation of scientific traditions and the improvement of the work of scientists, but a completely different goal. It has been expressed only by a hint, but over the past 15 years we have learned to understand these simple hints. This is the redistribution of property between socially close groups that exist not only in business and in power, but also in the near -scientific sphere. If you want to warn the possible reforms carried out by the Academy, and completely take everything into your own hands, then the moment for this is chosen for sure.

4. As far as I can judge by the areas close to me, the overall level of Russian science is quite consistent with the level of Russia in other areas of activity; In some areas, our country is included in twenty, and maybe even in the eight of developed countries. It is easy to confirm this conclusion by any independent audits and indices.

But there is no reason to claim more our science. And the reasons for this should be sought not in the events of the most recent years, but in what caused in Soviet and present times the waves of the emigration of scientists and their distrust of power, and idiosyncrazia to bureaucratic dullness.

All these reasons not only did not go into the past, but on the contrary, they return to an accelerated pace. Therefore, all these claims of the authorities to the level of Russian science should attribute to itself. Meanwhile, the prospects of science in the country are becoming more gloomy. But the situation worsens every day. The point is not how scientists work and what is their citation, but what is the status of science in the state, what is the role of fundamental science, what is the social and material situation of scientists.

5. Both science and scientists themselves are not in demand in today's Russia, they are not noticed by power. The opinions of scientists on scientific and other problems are either ignored, or are hushed up, and it is clear that they are not heard in media. At the same time, observations of the legislative and practical activities of modern authorities lead to the conclusion that scientifically substantiated, balanced and thoughtful decisions are not characteristic of the current administration. Its methods are more of a voluntarist character, they are permeated with allusions with Soviet times.

The story with the Academy is a good example of this, and there is something to remember. Stalin wanted to destroy the academy after sharp performances by I.P. Pavlov and some other academicians. The Academy in the 1930s was flooded with a new generation of communists far from science. V.M. Molotov even became an honorary academician.

What happened next, we know well (read the article by V. Soifer on page 8-9. -Ed. ). Of course, the Academy became obedient, but did not escape the terrible Stalinist repressions in the late 1930-1940s. It is useful to read the martyrologist of that time. Later, Khrushchev also wanted to dissolve the academy, which opposed the election of the Lysenkovites, but thought better of it in time. Brezhnev forced academicians to sign collective letters against Sakharov, against star wars; Only a few dared to refuse this. The Soviet rulers suffered the academy and even the front of some of its members (S.P. Kapitsa, L.D. Landau) for purely pragmatic considerations, but not because scientists belong to the country's intellectual elite. And in the bill under discussion, we again see something very similar to the past.

6. How can the scientific community respond to an unprecedented action of the authorities? It should defend its position in all legal ways and not be afraid of confrontation with the authorities. There must be strategic and tactical action plans: what will be inpatient in the future and what to do now. The priority need is to create an organization or body, possibly divided, as now, into several departments in large branches of science, which will represent and protect the interests of scientific institutions and laboratories of the Academy.

The Academy itself could be such a body, but with an essential representation and the decisive rights of institutions and laboratories. The preservation of the independence of employees of the Academy institutions from officials (including academic) is the main and perhaps the only concern of those who do not want to ditch the remnants of science in Russia. Only those who do not understand the true state of things at all, speak of the transfer of institutions of the Russian Academy of Sciences to universities or to the hands of other departments. Maybe this will be reasonable, but in a very distant perspective, as a certain strategic goal.

The rest - “improving the effectiveness of research” and so on - will make scientists themselves if they have material and legal opportunities for scientific work, to attract scientific youth and for contacts with the world scientific community.