Translated material
If there is no truth, everything is allowed
A letter from academicians “On the methods of scientific research and dissertation by V. R. Medinsky” was recently published [1]. The letter states that the criteria of truth cannot be replaced by the “interests of Russia”, as Medinsky proposes, that patriotic rhetoric cannot justify incompetence that no administrative pressure in connection with the examination of the dissertation of the official is acceptable. The authors of the letter demand to return the dissertation for consideration by the scientific council of the Ural Furniture and resigned the leaders of the Higher Attestation Commission, "who had caused their actions to serious damage to his reputation."
We consider it necessary to add that the matter, of course, is not only and not so much in Medinsky. His dissertation and the defense line are only an eloquent example of a rather terrible trend: denial of truth as a goal of research, and not only research, as a guide to decision making. You can rephrase Dostoevsky: "If there is no truth, everything is allowed." Immediately, the story with 28 Panfilovites. Here are the absurd courts, egregious violations of the Constitution and state propaganda, trying to convince people that they lie that there are no truths, but there are only interests. This is a very important line that scientists should defend the first.
Fortov was in vain retreated from this letter. He told the truth: this is the point of view of individual academicians. But is the leitmotif of the letter - the primacy of scientific truth before any interests - does not deserve the support of the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences? It was enough to say that, regardless of Medinsky, he shares his main thesis. Well, he knows better, of course.
The editors of the Trinity Option are attached to the requirements formulated in the letter. We also urge readers to support the initiative of the authors of writing in all possible ways.
B. Sh.
2. Comments of the signing of the letter were published on Polit.ru: http://polit.ru/article/2016/10/30/medinsky_vs_ras/
3. See also the commentary of Alexander Belavin: https://openrussia.org/post/view/19094/