New "Science"

A video appeared on the Web in the NIYAU MEPhI Chairman of the First Council on Theology of Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeeva), PhD ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-zsbnznx-4 ). Blogger "LJ", laureate of the Enlightener Prize, our permanent author Alexander Panchin ( http://scinquisitor.livejournal.com/107328.html ) gave his comments on this.

In the mentioned council on June 1, 2017 at 10:30 at the address: Moscow, st. Pyatnitskaya, d. 4/2, p. 1, aud. 115 - the first defense will be held in the specialty 26.00.01 - “Theology”.

It seems to me that the Metropolitan’s performance dispels all illusions about the adequacy of what is happening better than any critical texts.

Let us take one of the official opponents of the first protection: Korolkov A. A., author of the chapter "Following the image of God: a religious and philosophical view of education." The second opponent is about the same.

But the leading organization surprises: the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Ironically on March 31, “205th meeting of the monthly open academic theoretical seminar“ Marx Readings ”” took place there.

It is curious that the Minister of Education and Science Olga Vasilieva used to be included in theology council, but now it is absent in the Council list. This is a little encouraging, although I did not find an order to change the composition of the Council.

Link to the Council: www.doctorantura.ru/ru/about/members .

The first dissertation by theology says that the scientific and theological method, among other things, is determined by a unique object and source of theological knowledge and the personal experience of faith and the life of a theologian implied by them. Is it necessary to explain that the scientific method based on faith is Oxymoron.

Alexander Sergeyev, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences of Forship against False Affairs, described exactly why the theologians are not satisfied with the existing situation with church, and not scientific degrees. After all, this gives certain advantages:

1. the right to irrevocable financing of research from the budget;
2. the right to influence the content of the scientific part of education;
3. the right to act as an objective expert in court and other bodies;
4. the right to vote in matters of recognition of the scientificity of other research;
5. The right to special attention and respect from society.

I propose to all scientists who are not indifferent to the fate of Russian science to consider:

1. Write a review for the dissertation. I note that the secretary of the council must read negative reviews. The review can be sent with a courier with a notification of receipt. It is better to do this over the next two weeks;
2. come to defense. Ask questions or read your review yourself. We must find out in advance how to get there. This defense and the following protection should become a tribune where scientists can, in the framework of the rules of science, express everything they think about theology. This is the possibility of an open scientific discussion of the scientific community, without the participation of which a decision was made on the introduction of theology in the list of scientific specialties of the Higher Attestation Commission;
3. If you are an employee of a leading organization, take the fact that thanks to your institute, the first defense of the theology dissertation may occur. I also note that this is a joint advice with Moscow State University. So my Alma Mater is tarnished.

Alternatively, get ready to accept theologians in academics. If you do not speak out, no one will speak out.

If the dissertation has value in the field of history or religious studies, it is not clear why the author does not defend himself in one of these specialties.

Alexander Panchin