日本科学史学会役員選挙について 選挙管理委員会公示

注目

『科学史通信』443号に、日本科学史学会の会長・委員・監査選出に関する選挙要領
が公示(下記リンクをクリック)されました。

日本科学史学会役員選挙について 選挙管理委員会公示

本公示に記載されている、推薦届・立候補者の言葉の様式は下記のリンク先にありま
す。ダウンロードしてご利用ください。

自薦用推薦届

他薦用推薦届

立候補者の言葉

選挙管理委員会からのよびかけ

「選挙管理委員会公示」に示しましたように、来年度へ向けて選挙が始まります。コロナ禍を乗り越えて科学史学会を力強く運営していくために、これまで経験のない方も含め、多くの方々からの立候補を期待しております。自薦および他薦候補者の多数の推薦をお待ちしています(なお、いずれの場合も11月末までの今年度会費納入が必要である点にご留意下さい)。ご協力をよろしくお願い致します。

2020年度選挙管理委員会

科学史と教育の研究会2021年1月の報告

●1月17日(日)の研究会の発表の報告

・柳沢克央 「学術会議問題のその後&米国の「内戦状態」について」
・溝畑 典宏 「HoundsfieldとCT開発50周年 ~1971年までになにがあったか」
・橋本五郎 「永久平和の観点からのカント哲学への興味」
・多久和俊明「板倉聖宣の広義の組織論 2」「たのしい科学史研究のために」

今月も資料発表について活発な議論ができたと思います。多様な発表になりました。ひきつづき,日本学術会議の問題を2名の方がとりあげて議論しました。市民,アマチュアの立場からの意見が出され,新しい研究や交流等のきっかけなったように思います。引き続き,研究会内のスラックや関連の研究会・サークルでも研究交流がさらに活発になりそうです。心より感謝申し上げます。

参加者 11名(多久和俊明)

科学史と科学教育の研究会2021年2月、3月の案内

世界・日本・個人をネットZOOMでつなぐ新しいカタチの研究会
● 科学史と科学教育の研究会
自由闊達な情報交換・研究のオープンな研究組織をめざして

                                             多久和俊明

●2月,3月の研究会
2月7日(日)
3月21日(日)

 ・資料は, 3日前の木曜日までに,添付送信してください。
 ・事前に申し込まれた資料にしたがって,発表と検討をしていきます。
  ・発表される方は,「何を」,「どこを」検討してほしいのかを明確にして下さい。時間の制約があるので焦点をしぼってください。

※  参加費 0円
※ 資料を募集します。資料のない方の参加も歓迎です。
※ ZOOMのやり方や使い方等については佐藤正助さんがやさしく教えてくれます。
※ 興味のある方は,佐藤正助さんmakke@extra.ocn.ne.jpに連絡して下さい。

国際会議論文賞募集締切近づく

IUHPST/DHST事務局からのリマインドです。

今夏7月25〜31日プラハに開かれる第26回科学史技術史国際会議(オンライン開催)で、募集している 「2021科学の歴史的哲学的方法論」論文賞IUHPST Essay Prize in History and Philosophy of Science 応募締切が1月15日になっています。「現代世界の問題に科学・技術・医学史及び哲学は何をなすことができるか?」をテーマにした55000〜10000語の未発表論文(英語)が対象です。締切 1月15日 Prof. Hasok Chang, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge (hc372@cam.ac.uk).までpdf を送付。

また、国際会議での個別発表論文の締切は1月10日です。詳しくは、下記をご覧ください。

https://www.ichst2021.org/call-for-stand-alone-abstracts/   (文責木本)

日本学術会議の活動と運営に関する記者会見(12月14日)のご報告

日本学術会議協力学術研究団体の皆さま

                                       令和2年12月25日

                             日本学術会議幹事会

 すでにお知らせした通り、12月16日の臨時幹事会の場で私たちは「日本学術会議のより良い役割 に向けて(中間報告)」を決定し、同日、井上信治科学技術政策担当大臣に提出するとともに懇談 を行いました。大臣はこの中間報告をもとに政府内での検討を進められ、昨日、その結果をお伝え いただくとともに、梶田会長らとの意見交換を行いました。

 また、昨日は年内最後の幹事会にあわせて、第25期になって5回目の記者会見も行い、10月総会 以降3カ月間の学術会議の活動について紹介するとともに、大臣との意見交換の内容について説明 いたしました。ついては、学協会の皆さんに記者会見資料をお送りするとともに、特に井上大臣と の意見交換の内容についてお知らせいたします。

 今後、中間報告に示した諸課題について学協会の皆さんのご意見もうかがいながら、さらなる検 討を進め、来年4月の総会の場でもご議論いただかねばなりません。設置形態をはじめとして、日 本学術会議にとってきわめて重要な審議を進めていく必要があることから、引き続き、学協会の皆 さんとも情報共有を重ね、ともに知恵を絞ってことに当たっていきたいと考えておりますので、ご 理解・ご協力をお願いいたします。 ※資料については、下記URLよりダウンロードをお願いします。

続きを読む

2021年1月9日第7回和文誌編集委員会開催予定

2020年10月10日(土)に第6回和文誌編集委員会を開催しました。
『科学史研究』296号は現在、三校の作成中です。2021年1月28日に刊行予定です。
次回の編集委員会は令和3年1月9日(土)を予定しています。
変更がある場合はHPで告知します。定例の編集委員会は3ヶ月に1回開催していますので、目安にしてください。
会員の皆様の積極的な投稿をお待ちしています。

「日本学術会議のより良い役割発揮に向けて」(中間報告)に関するご連絡

日本学術会議より下記の連絡をいただきましたので転載します。正式な情報は日本学術会議のwebサイト等で確認をお願いします。

「日本学術会議のより良い役割発揮に向けて」(中間報告)に関するご連絡

2020年12月16日
日本学術会議幹事会

 日本学術会議がより良い役割を発揮できるようになるために、5項目の改革について検討して参 りましたが、このたび、現時点までの検討の中間的な結果を幹事会としてとりまとめ、「日本学術 会議のより良い役割発揮に向けて」(中間報告)として、ホームページにて公表するとともに、本日 (12月16日)、梶田隆章会長より、井上内閣府特命担当大臣(科学技術政策)に報告いたしま したので、ご連絡申し上げます。

http://www.scj.go.jp/index.html

http://www.scj.go.jp/ja/member/iinkai/kanji/pdf25/siryo305-tyukanhoukoku.pd

 今回の中間報告を基に、引き続き、日本学術会議のより良い役割発揮に向けた具体的な検討を進 めて参ります。会員・連携会員・学協会の皆様には、様々なかたちで御意見をお伺いしつつ、検討 状況等についての情報提供をさせていただきたいと考えておりますので、今後とも御理解、御協力 を賜れますと幸いです。

2021年1月17日科学史と教育の研究会のお知らせ

● 科学史と教育の研究会
さらに自由闊達な情報交換・研究のオープンな研究組織をめざして
                         多久和俊明
●1月の研究会は
1月17日(日)8:50~12:30

その後の予定
2月7日(日)
3月21日(日)
来年度は定例化を検討したいと思います。(例えば,第3日曜日とか)

続きを読む

日本学術会議第25期推薦会員任命拒否に関する人文・社会科学系学協会共同声明(続報)

人文・社会科学系の学協会が言語学、文学、哲学、宗教学、歴史学、文化人類学、心理学、社会学、社会福祉学、社会政策学、経済学、経営学、法学、政治学、科学史、教育学などといった個別分野の枠を超えてまとまって一緒に意見表明を行うということは、これまでなかったことです。
しかも「共同声明」への参加・賛同学協会数は11月4日時点では226でしたが、共同声明最新版(2020年12月2日時点)では310にまで増大しています。
共同声明に参加・賛同した学協会の数がそのように多数にのぼること、人文科学・社会科学に関わるほぼすべての研究領域の学協会が参加・賛同しているということは、今回の任命拒否問題によって、人文・社会科学系の様々な分野の学協会に不安や心配が広がっていることを強く示すものです。

共同声明の運動を社会に広く知って頂くため、11月6日に日本記者クラブで、12月2日に外国人記者クラブで共同記者会見が下記のようにおこなわれました。

続きを読む

President’s Statement : We Demand the Retraction of the Refusal by the Government to Appoint Nominees as Council Members to the Science Council of Japan

We Demand the Retraction of the Refusal by the Government to Appoint Nominees as Council Members to the Science Council of Japan

Tadaaki Kimoto
President, The History of Science Society of Japan
October 11, 2020

At the inception of the 25th term of the Science Council of Japan, the government has refused to appoint six of the candidates who were elected by the Science Council of Japan. This measure, taken from a political standpoint, refusing candidates elected in accordance with the Science Council of Japan Act and based on the judgement of scientists is an act that tramples upon the law and Article 23 of the Constitution of Japan, which provides for academic freedom, and is therefore totally unacceptable. We demand that the six candidates be appointed immediately.

The Science Council of Japan, after a reorganization of the pre-war National Research Council of Japan, the Imperial Academy and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, was established in 1949 as a “special organization” under the jurisdiction of the prime minister operating independently of the government.

The Preamble to the Science Council of Japan Act, which indicates the ground for the establishment of the Council, states that, standing in the conviction that science is the foundation of a cultured nation, under the collective will of scientists, the mission of the Science Council of Japan is to contribute to the peaceful reconstruction of Japan, to the well-being of human society, and to scientific progress in partnership with the world’s academic societies.

This is because scientists who faced the task of rebuilding a peaceful nation from the devastation of the defeat, deeply reflected on their experiences of the prewar system and cooperation with the war; the suppression of freedom of speech and learning by the prewar military state power such as that represented by the “emperor-organ theory” (theory of the Emperor as an organ of government) incident and the Takigawa incident in the 1930s, or inhumane research under the influence of the military, who made frequent visits to universities, forcibly mobilizing scientists for military research, including the development of poisonous gas and biological weapons, human experimentation, research on death rays and atomic bombs, and research on development of weapons for the arming of the whole national people. Furthermore, the ideal of this preamble, which promises to contribute to peace and the well-being of human society was summarized in statements refuting the conduct of scientific research for military purposes in 1950 and 1967. In 2017, opposing the introduction by the Ministry of Defense of Research Promotion System of Military Security Technology Fund in 2015, it was announced that these statements would be unremittingly adhered to.

At the same time, for the council’s purpose of promoting and enhancing the field of science, and having science reflected in and permeated into administration, industries, and people’s lives, the Council has proposed the establishment of a large number of research institutes and centers such as the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University, as well as laying the foundation for the joint utilization research system. The Council has also made efforts to secure the sufficiency, comprehensiveness and diversity of basic research, and has made repeated recommendations for the Science and Technology Basic Plan. The recommendation for the three principles of democracy, independence, and openness, which have been built in the Atomic Energy Basic Law in 1955, and   become Japan’s basic stance for nuclear research, development and usage, are derived from the basic stance of reflection upon the prewar academic system and reflecting the achievements of science in the people’s lives.

Internationally, as an institution representing Japan, the Council has affiliated with international science organizations in many scientific fields, including the International Council for Science (ICSU. In 2017, ISCU integrated with the International Social Science Council, ISSC, to form the International Science Council, ISC), and has made great contributions to the state of and promotion of science and technology in Japan, such as enhancing scientific research in Japan, in partnership with world academia.

Independence from the administrative command mechanism has been acclaimed since the time of the Council’s inception due to reflections upon history and the natural relationship between science and society, but it is natural that some recommendations are at times critical of government policy. The government being dissatisfied with these critical opinions and attitudes of the Council, reduced the power of the Science Council by partially amending the Science Council of Japan Act in 1983, and at the same time established the Council for Science and Technology as an advisory body to the prime minister on science and technology policy. The 2004 revision of the law brought about a further deterioration of the “scholarly parliament” character that brings together the collective will of scholars, but the Council has still developed activities based on the objectivity, criticality and comprehensiveness necessary to deepen communication between scientists by maintaining independence and to develop science and utilize the achievements. Since 2008 the Council has made more than 300 recommendations.

In order to further strengthen the social function of the Science Council of Japan, which is to promote and enhance the field of science, and have science reflected in and permeated into administration, industries, and people’s lives (Article 2 of the Act), it is necessary to enhance its independence and strengthen its democratic. communication capabilities. This is because the progress and methods of scientific research are diverse, and freedom of thinking and flexibility, freedom of speech and thought, and democratic debate among scientists are particularly required.

There are various opinions about how scientific research and scientific measures should tackle unknown problems, and there may be various ways of evaluating scientific achievements. If the administration of the time arbitrarily excludes some of them, this will eventually distort the scientific process of reaching the necessary conclusions by demonstrating the maximum benefit of the scientific capabilities of the current society through the exchange of diverse opinions. There are various methods and possibilities through which scientific achievements may contribute to the well-being of the people of the nation, comprehensive judgments being required from a scientific standpoint. But here, too, what is strongly required is, once again, the publication of scientific achievements, freedom of speech and research stance and independent judgment, the independence of academic content, and a democratic cooperative system.

Research on the new coronavirus and virus countermeasures are also full of unknown problems, but if political criteria are introduced to exclude some scientists simply because they do not coincide with the interests of the administration, the neutral scientific investigative activities required of scientists may be hindered and finally fall short of the expectations of the public. Judgment criteria based on political interests or an administrative standpoint are not always in harmony with the scientific criteria of scientists, but rather distort scientific judgments, and thus the utilization of scientific achievements may ultimately be contrary to the interests of the people of the nation. It is impossible to forget the bitter experience of the history of Japan’s nuclear power, that is, the promotion of the “safety myth” through the exclusion of the scientific views and knowledge of some scientists on the basis of the so-called “nuclear village,” formed due to cooption by political and economic interests, that resulted in the terrible damage brought about by the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident on March 11, 2011 and the great many people who are still not able to return to their hometowns.

The method of selecting members of the Science Council of Japan has changed from a popular-vote election system at the outset, to a system of recommendations from academic societies in 1983, and finally, from 2004, to the cooptation system of the present day. The criteria for selecting members are excellent research or achievements, and each method has had its own problems. However, in each of these cases, intervention into matters of personnel from the totally different dimension of the administration, bringing into science the criteria of accommodation with specific administrative purposes, threatening the crucially important academic freedom and freedom of speech in science, which influences research methods, democratic debate among scientists, scientists’ attitudes, and thus harms the autonomous development of science. Ultimately, it may undermine the interests of the people of the nation.

The refusal to appoint candidates this time is said by Prime Minister Suga to be “an appropriate measure based on the law” and a “comprehensive and bird’s-eye view” measure, but the reasons and criteria for the refusal have not been indicated. If there is a selection standard that differs from the Science Council of Japan Act, it cannot be persuasive unless it is clearly stated. To the contrary, there is no option but to say that this is political intervention in personnel matters that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Science Council of Japan Act. While this political intervention obstructs autonomous and free academic activity, we have little option but to harbor suspicions that the lack of explanation for the reasons behind the refusal are, in the end, an aim to carry into the scientific community the kind of politics of “sontaku” (the performance of pre-emptive acts designed to ingratiate oneself with one’s superiors) that brought about a barbaric destruction of official documents unparalleled in history. Scientific research challenges the unknown, but at the same time it is also a challenge to academic and social authority, including the scientists themselves. If academic freedom is suppressed and “sontaku” prevails, democratic, free-spirited debate and the enterprising spirit in the scientific community that confronts social and academic powers and authorities, and pioneers the unknown, may be impeded. If this occurs, looking to the long term, this may lead to the power of scientists to confront the unknown being diminished, the “scientific ability” of society being impaired, and this may result in disempowering the people of the nation to pursue profits.

We are strongly concerned that the government’s recent measure will harm not only the Science Council of Japan but also the scientific community and the lives of the people of the nation, and we therefore demand the prompt retraction of the refusal to appoint the six candidates and their immediate appointment

Furthermore, on October 9, Prime Minister Suga explained that he did not see the list of the 105 nominees submitted by the Science Council of Japan, only a list of 99 people (six nominees having already been excluded). If this is true, the very fact that the decision was a “comprehensive and bird’s-eye view” decision is doubtful, and even calls into suspicion the falsification of official documents. What is therefore required is an accurate explanation of the process from the submission of the recommendation document by the President of the Science Council of Japan to the decision to appoint 99 nominees, and the reasons for the refusal to appoint the six nominees.

https://historyofscience.jp/blog/2020/10/13/presidents-statement-2020-10-11j/ (Japanese)[1] 


 [1]Translation includes some supplement.