Translated material
Scientific community and development of Russia
Coming to the shocking “Operation of the Russian Academy of Sciences”, some of the scientific community begins to realize his new state and its dynamics (see, for example, an article by Askold Ivanchik “The Fate of Science in Russia is not interested in anyone” [1]), while experiencing a rather wide set of feelings.
These feelings are fueled by the next actions of the Russian authorities within the framework of the postoperative moratorium, designed to “ensure the preservation of structural integrity, property and personnel resources of organizations under the jurisdiction of the Russian Academy of Sciences, RAMS and RAMS, within a year from the date of their transfer to Fano” . The moratorium was officially written about this in the list of presidential assignments of January 15, 2014, which gives a certain time and, together with a number of other events, a lot of food for reflection on what has happened and its consequences.
However, there were plenty of time for reflection on representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the rest of the scientific community, since the “attacks” in the Russian Academy of Sciences began for a long time. However, these perennial challenges were not perceived not quite adequately, without giving rise to quite meaningful, organized, mass and decisive response actions. At one time, attention was repeatedly paid to this circumstance both in the media and the general meetings of the Russian Academy of Sciences, but in the end, such performances were “wound up”, “lusting” or simply ignored.
Of the numerous examples of this kind, we mention the “epic” of braking on the initiative of the general meeting of the department of the physical sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which adopted in May 2010 an appeal to the general meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences with a proposal for an extraordinary general meeting to consider a number of sore issues, which the Academy eventually did not manage to hold a three -year period of existence for it. About one of the stages of this epic -the performance of Academician A.A. Slavnova on the RAS OS-you can read, in particular, in the journal "Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences" (vol. 80, No. 9, 2010), where the performance of the vice president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, academician A.F. Andreeva, containing such a remarkable fragment:
“The central thought that is expressed by representatives of the world scientific community: the Russian Academy of Sciences is the most authoritative organization of our country. Of course, I am nice to say about it here. But the current situation gives rise to some problems for us.
Due to the extremely high authority of our Academy, a number of European organizations expresses the intention to attract wounds to cooperation on issues, the study of which, in general, was not characteristic of us. For example, the European Academy of Sciences and Arts proposes to engage in purely political problems of the relationship between Russia and Europe. However, foreign policy is the prerogative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. President of the Russian Academy of Sciences Yu.S. Osipov always emphasizes that our Academy is not engaged in pure policy, and at the same time we cannot engage in politics at all, since there is a science “political science”. ”
An attentive reader cannot but feel in the style of this passage of the elements of a special language, which, however, makes it clear that the positions of the president and vice president on this issue do not coincide. Presidential argument may seem quite logical at first glance if you do not pay attention to the existence of such a science as political science and other real facts, including the degree of “purity” of real policy. Moreover, following such an argument leads to the conclusion that the Academy should stay away from the internal affairs, since there are also ministries on this subject. That is, the scientific community should “know its six” and not meddle in the affairs of serious people, even if they affect the interests of the community.
All lessons from such inadequacy and insufficiency should be very well learned by those, at least who is ready to spend their extra time and their forces to ensure the normal existence of science in our country. This task is by no means trivial, and its successful solution requires quite definite, including organizational efforts.
It is interesting to note that a similar task is actually indicated in the above list of instructions, paragraph 2B of which reads: “To develop and approve the plan of measures for expert scientific support for the Russian Academy of Sciences of the Government of the Russian Federation for the development of large scientific, technical and socio-economic programs and projects for the medium term.” Obviously, in such a situation, much will depend on the activity and content of the position of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the scientific community. Will the academic structures obediently “examination” “only the projects proposed by him“ from above ”or will, in addition, show an independent initiative in the expert analysis of others, including the projects already accepted for execution, as well as to develop their own projects to be subject to public examination? And what socio-economic problems should such initiative programs and projects be devoted? The answers to such questions would be worth obtaining a scientific community from all official bodies involved in this, while forming its own position with the help of the necessary research with the participation of all structures at its disposal in the very near future.
On January 15, it was decided to hold a new session of the conference of scientific workers of the Russian Academy of Sciences on the eve of the General Assembly of the Academy of Sciences. In my opinion, the quality of preparation and conduct of this conference, the content and effectiveness of discussion of the tasks presented on it can significantly affect the subsequent development of events that directly affect the interests of the scientific community.
A similar statement is true in relation to the upcoming general meeting of the OHP, which should determine the actions of the company for the next year. OHR will, in particular, have to decide in their relations with other socio-political organizations. It is obvious that a similar problem in one form or another is relevant for the entire scientific community, which is characterized by a very wide range of socio-political mindset.
It is noteworthy that in the social sphere, science workers are often “disconnected” for various reasons from the seemingly inherent professional qualities that require compliance with the logic of reasoning and conclusions, the completeness of actual material, etc. Similar “shutdowns” or, according to another terminology, “turning the fools” should always be clearly fixed with subsequent appropriate conclusions. In the absence of such a preventive examination, any collective actions of the scientific community are doomed to failure due to the loss of a common language, that is, for the same elementary reason, which in biblical times prevented the construction of a well-known tower.
The scientific community cannot go away from the fundamental question of what exactly is being built in Russia now and how it really has been reflected and continues to reflect on our lives. The severity of this issue once again was indicated at two January events: meetings of the Club "Mercury" with the performance of the academician and former prime minister E.M. Primakova and a meeting of the Gaidar forum with a performance by the head of the Government of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev [2.3]. Postoperative difficulties that have fallen on the scientific community should not become an obstacle to his participation in solving this fundamental and fundamental issue.
1. Www.Vedomosti.ru/opinion/news/21261611/kto-ih-prosil-stanovitsya-kademikami