Science Fundamentally Needs a Space of Freedom

In modern situation the economics-oriented approach has spread to all possible spheres of human activity, including science. In addition, management and marketing have become considered scientific areas, naturally applied to the organization of academic research, taking increased efficiency and bigger sales as criteria of success. The position of the researcher turns out to be extremely contradictory: science is done by people working in certain organizations and being financially dependent on these organizations and, accordingly, the position of the scientist or the scholar is set by a job description. On the other hand, their places in the informal hierarchy are related to the level of research and the quality of knowledge presented individually to the scientific community that is in no way connected to the organization in question. This contradiction is particularly relevant for fundamental science, but it is also important for applied research that relies on it. Economocentrism requires appropriate administration which refers to what are considered objective indicators that can be measured quantitatively. However, this external administration leads to the degradation of the institution of science. Policies for the humanities and natural sciences require separate analyses. The article concludes by showing that the elements that make up the classical management of an organization are in principle inapplicable to science. And here it is possible to speak only about providing the researcher with a space of freedom.

management, fundamental sciences, applied sciences, efficiency of research work, economocentrism, criteria for assessing results, assessing research activity