Scholars are objecting to a decision by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education to let stand what they’re calling a “flawed and unconstitutional” evaluation of the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences (IFiS PAN).
The evaluation, which scholars say came about because “the previous government deliberately used flawed and ambiguous legal regulations to undermine IFiS PAN’s scientific results for political reasons,” seems at odds with the facts, and has serious consequences for the institute, such as depriving it of its ability to recruit doctoral students or award doctoral degrees.
An open letter in support of the Institute is here.
A professor of philosophy in Poland provided a helpful description of what is going on, including information about the relevant background and what’s at stake:
The Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences (IFiS PAN) faces an unprecedented crisis stemming from a deeply flawed evaluation process that resulted in a “B” category rating in philosophy—a decision that stripped the institute of essential academic rights, including the ability to award doctoral degrees, recruit doctoral students, and conduct habilitation (the Polish equivalent of tenure) procedures.
The evaluation’s absurdity is starkly illustrated by a glaring contradiction: while IFiS PAN received Poland’s lowest score for scientific publications, it simultaneously achieved the highest score for philosophical research grants—an impossible paradox given that grant success typically depends on publication excellence.
When IFiS PAN challenged this evaluation, it became one of two institutions to win its case, with the Provincial Administrative Court ruling on November 17, 2023, that the evaluation violated a fundamental principle of Polish administrative law: authorities must base their decisions on actual facts rather than potentially incorrect documentation. Instead, the ministry system that IFiS PAN had to use to submit our publication record most likely did not properly classify the publishers of 44 monographs published over the evaluation period (treating publishers such as Brill as unknown entities). The classification error, in fact, was introduced by the flawed ministry system.
Under Polish administrative law, whenever authorities discover a potential clerical mistake, they are bound to rectify it. And there is a clear procedure they could use to do this after the Provincial Administrative Court ruling. Yet, despite this clear legal victory and a change in government, the Ministry’s response has been to “eagerly await” a Supreme Court ruling rather than rectify the situation, choosing to prolong the legal battle through an appeal instead of conducting a fair, fact-based reassessment. This stance suggests a troubling continuity with the previous government’s politically motivated policies, prioritizing bureaucratic procedures over academic merit and truth.
The open letter calls upon the Minister of Science and Higher Education to “take swift action to rectify this situation.” Academics from various countries, including some very well-known philosophers, are among its signatories.