Аннотация: O friend Arkady, do not speak beautifully. About science. A culturological essay.
O friend Arkady, do not speak beautifully. About science. A culturological essay.
"MOSCOW, February 20 [2022]. /TASS/. The first services of the "Nauka" domain on the Gostech platform are planned to be launched by the beginning of the new academic year. (...) ... a new industry management architecture has been developed and a new state program for scientific and technological development has been launched." [unofficial translation] (https://nauka.tass.ru/nauka/13772699?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop)
As long as modern civilization exists, so much the problem of the development of science exists ...
You can philosophize on this topic a lot ...
From the huge amount of information I will try to highlight a few of the most obvious theses.
Thesis nomber one. There is no need to replace the problem of the human factor with beautiful reasoning and words, with the talks about digital platforms.
There are no people with trust, power, qualifications and positive aspirations.
In the best possible scenario, such people should themselves look for "mad scientists" and give them a "green light".
There are no such people. And have they ever existed in history? It seems that memory suggests some examples, but all these examples are somehow insufficiently convincing, with some element of some doubtfulness. (To recall the descendants of Heinrich Schliemann? Somebody of them for a time funded Igor Bogdanov's research into the Schliemann archives and Bogdanov's publication of books about Schliemann... Is this an adequate example?)
So, there are no scientific philanthropists with a power and endowed with resources. But there is an example when, in the era of the USSR, crazy and not crazy enthusiasts wrote appeals to the Kremlin and sought admission to tests, to funding ...
This is below the level of scientific philanthropy. Here you need to write, to wait, to achieve of somebody's benevolence, goodwill. But this mechanism was working. He was driven by historical compulsion - it was necessary to cover a hundred years in ten years.
Thesis second. Who, how and for what gives a "scientific money"? Those figures who in the Kremlin launched a new scientific directions did not use the people of science as a resource. Influential people were separatly, and people of science were separatly. Influential people did not use people of science as social humus - they did not receive scientific titles, they did not receive (officially) a share of scientific money ... People of science, after trying to win a high favor, could at least hope to find an impartial (finantionaly disinterested) assessment of their initiatives ...
Thesis three. Let's take a concrete modern example for illustration. Everyone is hearing about the activity around the world's most famous Russian vaccine.
According to my estimate, from 50 to 500 people participated in its development. It was a good chance to make an attempt to bring to the social surface a certain number of potentially capable people of science. What had to be done for this? To reward everyone. To give everyone money and fame. To give everyone the opportunity to start their own "scientific business". There was a chance that one or two people (out of those who had tasted money and fame) would turn out to be really useful (for science and for society) people.
What do we see in reality? Several figures - from among those who perform administrative duties - were brought to the fore, awarded, endowed with money, fame and titles ...
It's the digital platform "Scientific Mind", it's a new architecture for managing the scientific industry.
They say that a percentage out of grants is set for influential people. If this is true, then the first services of the "Nauka" domain will, of course, change the situation radically. And owing to the implementation of the new state program of scientific and technological development, Russia will break ahead of all the players in the scientific field...
I will complete this note with what I started with - the question is in the lack of people, and not the lack of platforms, the lack of the architecture of the management of the scientific industry, the lack of new state programs for scientific and technological development - and in the lack of other beautiful words.
"Look," said Arkady suddenly, "a dry maple leaf has come off and is falling to the ground; its movements are completely similar to the flight of a butterfly. Isn't it strange? The most sad and dead is similar to the most cheerful and alive. "O my friend, Arkady Nikolaitch!" exclaimed Bazarov. "I ask you one thing: do not speak beautifully." [unofficial translation] (From the novel (Ch. 21) "Fathers and Sons" (1862) by Ivan Turgenev (1818-1883)).
February 20, 2022 21:31
Translation from Russian into English: February 20, 2022 22:21
Владимир Владимирович Залесский "О друг Аркадий, не говори красиво. О науке. Культурологическая заметка".
{ 2815. О друг Аркадий, не говори красиво. О науке. Культурологическая заметка.
MMDCCLXXXV. O friend Arkady, do not speak beautifully. About science. A culturological essay. }