Michał Kokowski

The article discusses the activities and the most significant achievements of the Science Studies Research Unit at the Institute for the History of Science PAS in 2022.

The article is a case study on the views of the famous T.S. Kuhn about the so-called Copernican revolution. Generally, Kuhn is presented as a very successful historian and philosopher of science: an author of world bestsellers. The division among his supporters, i.e. about so-called left-wing and right-wing Kuhnians, is recalled, and the fact that Kuhn himself vehemently dissociated from a large proportion of his adherents. It is also noted here, that in the last 30 years, in addition to abundant hagiographic literature on T. S. Kuhn, there have also been a few critical studies of Kuhn’s achievements.

The rest of the article presents the author’s critical analysis of Kuhn’s views on the so-called Copernican Revolution, which formed the basis of Kuhn’s scheme of scientific development presented in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962); i.e. the world’s most famous monograph in social sciences and humanities so far.

The criticism encompasses a genesis, content and reception of Kuhn’s views and the development of his interpretations. The analysis is carried out by the means of methodology of historical sciences and a scientific method, which the author describes as the hypothetico-deductive method of correspondence thinking.

The criticism is based on the author’s current publications (developed here further on), which were sadly unnoticed by the researchers, although presented in the world center for the Copernican research, and are available on the Internet freely.

This fact leads the author to the assumption that international Kuhnian research is underdeveloped seriously and that strong prejudices – barriers may exist in scientific circles, such as, e.g., primacy of number of citations (and other bibliometric indicators) over content analysis, the Matthew effect, the effect of alleged and actual scientific centers and peripheries, some mental remnants of the Cold War, as well as underdevelopment of scientific communication.

The article presents: a) updating the rules for evaluating journals in the evaluation model developed in the Pracownia Naukoznawstwa IHN PAN (Science Studies and Science-of-Science Unit of the Institute for History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences), b) scoring journals in the history of science according to the lists of journals of the MNiSW (2017), MEiN (2021), MEiN (2023), PN IHN PAN (2022) and PN IHN PAN (2023), c) comparison of the scoring of journals in history and history of science in the lists of journals: ministerial and PN IHN PAN, as well as Scopus, DOAJ, Index Copernicus International, PKP Preservation Network and Keepers Register.

The conclusion of the article is an open appeal to the Minister of Education and Science to award, in the next update of the ministerial list of journals, 200 points to the journal “Studia Historiae Scientiarum” and 140 to the journal “Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki”, because these journals, devoted to the history of science, are not inferior in terms of achievements to Polish historical journals, which have already obtained 200 and 140 points by the decision of the Minister of Education and Science of July 17, 2023.

The article is an extension of the plenary lecture delivered on February 16, 2023 in the Hall of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences on the occasion of Nicolaus Copernicus’s 550th birth anniversary and the 150th anniversary of the first public meeting of the Academy of Arts and Sciences in Krakow.

An answer to the key question: “Why are we still interested in Nicolaus Copernicus?” is formulated. It concerns the multidimensional space of issues, including: man, society, culture (science, theology and religion, fine arts), ideas, concepts, time – space. And all of the above is discussed in changing historical contexts.

This subject is approached from the perspective of the methodology of historical sciences and the history of science, history, history and philosophy of science, history of ideas, scientific cosmology and general cultural cosmology, history of art and culture, history of theology and religion, history of memory, political and geopolitical history, sociology and cultural studies: the cultural role of great heroes / geniuses and collective work in culture, as well as the role of occasional celebrations and the figure of Copernicus as an “advertising brand”.

The activity of the PAU Commission on the History of Science in the academic year 2022/2023 was discussed.

Lists of scientific meetings, conferences, scientific sessions and seminars as well as new publications were presented.

The article outlines the tenth phase of the development of the journal “Studia Historiae Scientiarum” (previously “Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU” / “Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science”).

Information is provided on the following matters: the journal’s evaluation by the “ICI Master Journal List 2021” (released at the end of 2022), the evaluation by the CWTS Journal Indicators 2022 (5 June 2023), the evaluation by the SCImago Journal Rankings 2022 (based on the data from Scopus released on April 2023), and the evaluation by Scopus 2022 (released on 5 June 2023).

Additionally, the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the current volume of the journal is quoted.

The article outlines the eleventh phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previously Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).Information is provided on the following: the journal’s evaluation by the ICI Master Journal List 2022 (released at the end of 2023), the evaluation by the CWTS Journal Indicators 2023 (5 June 2024), the evaluation by the SCImago Journal Rankings 2023 (based on the data from Scopus released in April 2024), the evaluation by Scopus 2023 (released on 5 June 2024), the evaluation by the PN IHN PAN 2023 (released on 5 October 2023), and the evaluation by Web of Science.

Additionally, the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the current volume of the journal is quoted.

This article presents a peer review of the book by Władysław Marek Kolasa on the historiography of the Polish press. It regards the methodology of historiography, the science of science and its sub-disciplines: scientometrics and bibliometrics.

This article presents a discussion of the monograph by A. Rafalska-Łasocha dedicated mainly to the contacts of Maria Skłodowska-Curie with the Krakow scientific community.

This article presents a discussion of two monographs reporting on their merits and shortcomings: Modi memorandi: Leksykon kultury pamięci by M. Saryusz-Wolska (2014), and Deutsch-Polnische Erinnerungsorte, vols 1–5 (2012–2015) / Polsko-niemieckie miejsca pamięci, vols 1–4 (2013–2015).

In the debate on scientometrics and bibliometrics, taking place in Poland in the last 25 years, a very serious methodical and methodological mistake has been committed by neglecting the reflection about the science of science, especially of historical and methodological character. The following article discusses this issue.
This aim was achieved with the use of a method of interdisciplinary research originating from the scope of the science of science and the history of the science of science. This method was applied to the analysis of selected major publications on scientometrics and bibliometrics in the past 25 years, with special emphasis on Polish context.
The results are discussed in the article, i.e. a) the context of the current debate on scientometrics and bibliometrics in Poland; b) the history of Polish scientometric analyses based on foreign indexation databases; c) the current discussion on scientometrics and bibliometrics in Poland and d) the key aspect ignored in the current debate, namely the inseparable connection of scientometrics and bibliometrics with the science of science.
The study leads to the following conclusions: it is postulated that the informetric (scientometric, bibliometric, Webometric, etc.) studies return to the scientific discourse, which would be consciously developed in the context of the integrated science of science. This knowledge should be utilized in the development of the current science policy, i.e. the organizational structure of science and higher education and the formation of rules of appraisal of scientific institutions, individual employees and scientific journals.

The article presents the character of Andrzej Pelczar (1937–2010): his genealogical pedigree, sketchy scientific biography, list of performed public functions, achievements in the history and philosophy of science against the achievements of the Kraków mathematical environment, and also it updates the information on the numerical state of the Kraków mathematical environment and Warsaw mathematical school.

The article presents essential reservations about the proposal and the adopted Act 2.0 vel Constitution for Science. It focuses on the analysis of two topics: model of university and model of evaluation of journals and books. Our analysis is made in the light of knowledge of integrated sciences of science (containing, i.a., history of science, history of organization of higher education system and science, scientometrics and bibliometrics) and a model of university of new humanism.

The article calls for introduction of series of vital modifications in the analyzed Act 2.0 and implementing regulations to remedy their fundamental drawbacks.

The bibliography presents the list of publications by Piotr Flin (1945–2018), an astronomer and exact sciences historian.

This study presents a list of two hundred and fifty (including two hundred and forty-three separate) publications of the late Piotr Flin and a list of three doctoral theses he supervised. It is likely that the list of publications presented is not a complete bibliography of the author’s works.

Due to the specificity of the study, the co-authored publications are listed in a chronological order, not an alphabetical order of co-authors. In addition, compared to the standard bibliographical style adopted in the journal, the date of publication appears at the end of each bibliographic record in square brackets. Providing the date in this format follows the convention adopted on the SAO / NASA portal Astrophysics Data System and its enriched copy: “The Science Archive Facility” at the European Southern Observatory. In accordance with the conventions adopted in the aforementioned portals, the list of publications also includes two reviews of a co-authored monograph by P. Flin.

The bibliography presents the list of publications by Zbigniew Bela (1949–2018), a philologist, prosaist, and historian of pharmacy.

The article comments on the famous paper by Boris Hessen “The Social and Economic Roots of Newton’s Principia” presented at the Second International Congress on the History of Science and Technology in London in 1931.

The comments are made in the light of considerations on the methodology of the historiography of science, including the author’s ideas of research hermeneutics and the research hermeneutics of the historiography of science, the biography of Boris Hessen, the history of scientific historiography, the history of science and the history of science-of-science.

The article synthetically presents Hessen’s research hermeneutics and points to its fundamental disadvantages. It describes the reception of Hessen’s paper in the West: both the more widely known positive reception (of Bernalists and their successors, including supporters of Marxist studies of science and the social history of science), and the much less known negative reception (members of the (British) Society for Freedom in Science, members of the Harvard group of J. B. Conant of General Education in Science).

The article also presents the changing fate of the reception of Hessen’s thoughts in the USSR and Russia in the years 1930–2020.

Additionally, it indicates various historiographic myths related to “Boris Hessen”, including the myth that the Polish science-of-science (Polish: naukoznawstwo) emerged later or at the same time as Russian science-of-science (Russian: науковедение, naukovedenie).

The defectiveness of Hessen’s research hermeneutics on the one hand, and on the other hand the reception of his views in the West and in the USSR and Russia from the 1930s to the 2020s, including the various historiographic myths related to Hessen, show how paradoxical the history of the historiography of science can be, and demonstrate the need to cultivate the skills of critical thinking among researchers interpreting science (i.e. historians of science, philosophers of science, sociologists of scientific knowledge, etc.).

The article discusses the criteria and procedure for the parametric evaluation of scientific journals according to the Bill of 6 June 2016 of the “Directive of the Minister of Science and Higher Education, Republic of Poland, dated .................... 2016 concerning the process of granting academic categories to scientific institutions”. It indicates serious legislative flaws as well as flaws concerning the science of science (including bibliometrics) in the Bill and proposes significant amendments to the provisions of this Directive. It indicates serious flaws of this Bill regarding legislation, the science of science (including bibliometrics), and proposes significant amendments to the content of the provisions of this Directive.

A methodology of historical or higher criticism and of stylometry/stylochronometry known from Biblical and literary studies is applied to the examination of Nicolaus Copernicus’s writings. In particular, his early work Commentariolus is compared at the level of the Latin language with his later ones (Meditata, Letter against Werner and De revolutionibus) as well as the texts of some other authors. A number of striking stylistic dissimilarities between these works have been identified and interpreted in the light of stylometry/stylochronometry, historical criticism and the history of Copernican research. The conducted research allowed to draw some plausible conclusions about the Sitz im Leben (historical context), the dating of Commentariolus and related matters.

Article available under CC BY license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode   

The article concerns the key problems of Polish ministerial lists of scientific journals, which are shown on the example of journals from the history and history of science, the idea of a new list according to the Unit for the Science of Science at the Institute for the History of Science (Polish Academy of Sciences) and the appreciation of the editorial and review activity in the Polish system of evaluation of scientific achievements.

The fundamental flaw in the procedure for creating the lists of scientific journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland (December 18, 2019) and the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Poland (February 9, 2021 / February 18, 2021) is the lack of reference to the achievements of the science of science, although it was established in Poland in 1916–1939 and has been fruitfully developed in the world ever since.

The bibliometric achievements of the 12 highest-scoring Polish journals from history, which received 100 points in the “List of journals of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Poland” (February 9, 2021 / February 18, 2021) were compared with the bibliometric achievements of the highest-scoring Polish journals from the sub-disciplines “history of science” or “history and philosophy of science”. Although they received only 40 points, they did not have fewer bibliometric achievements than Polish historical journals rated at 100 points.

A comparison of bibliometric achievements of 18 Polish history journals indexed in Scopus showed that in 2019 and 2020, the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum had the highest values of these indicators.

On this basis, it is justified to claim that in the case of Polish journals in the discipline of “history” and sub-disciplines “history of science” and “history and philosophy of science”, the ministerial list of journals was built on the basis of non-objective and non-transparent rules. Such a critical remark also applies to the previous lists of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland, including the list of December 18, 2019.

It is therefore necessary to: a) thoroughly improve the scores of Polish journals in the sub-disciplines “history of science” and “history and philosophy of science” in the short term, because maintaining such verdicts will lead to an unjustified depreciation of scientific achievements in the field of these sub-disciplines during the evaluation of Polish academic units, and b) develop a new Polish model for evaluating journals in the long term.

Bearing in mind the achievements of the integrated science of science, in particular the method of correspondence thinking and the idea of scientific (r)evolution by Michał Kokowski, praxeological research in the spirit of Tadeusz Kotarbiński, scientific communication and the trend named the responsible metrics, a new model of journal evaluation is presented.

The idea of objective measures of journal’s achievements and the costs of publishing in it are described: the journal’s achievement measure (JAM)©, the journal’s cost-effectiveness measure (JCEM)© and the normalized journal’s cost-effectiveness measure (NJCEM)©.

This is followed by a presentation of Rules for the creation of lists of scientific journals according to the Unit for the Science of Science at the Institute for the History of Science (Polish Academy of Sciences)©.

It is postulated that relevant appreciation of editorial and review activity in the Polish system of evaluation of scientific achievements should be introduced by modifying the current regulation on the evaluation of scientific achievements.

Article available under CC BY-NC-ND  license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pl/legalcode   

Evolutionary Transformation of the Journal. Part 9

The article outlines the ninth phase of the development of the journal “Studia Historiae Scientiarum” (previous name “Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU” / “Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science”).

Two basic ways of developing scientific journals have been distinguished: as a purely scientific enterprise or a purely business enterprise – the journal “Studia Historiae Scientiarum” follows the former model.

Information is provided on the following matters: the journal’s evaluation by the “ICI Master Journal List 2020” (released at the end of 2021), the evaluation by the Ministry of Education and Science of Poland (released on December 1 / 21, 2021), the evaluation by Scopus (released on 5 May 2022), and the evaluation by the SCImago Journal Rankings 2021 (based on the data from Scopus released on April 2022).

Additionally, the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the current volume of the journal is quoted.

From volume 21 (2022), the journal “Studia Historiae Scientiarum” has implemented additional organizational solutions: a CC BY license for the texts of articles (retaining the possibility of other licenses for illustrations), the CrossMark service and the publishing option, the so-called FirstView Articles.

It is outlined the third phase of the development of the journal Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU (Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). In June 2016 Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU 2015,  vol. XIV was issued. Following the legal decision with effect from 4 July 2016 the journal, while maintaining the continuity of its publication, has been renamed to Studia Historiae Scientiarum. Since June 2016 the journal has a new website with an editorial panel on the Scientific Journals Portal. At the same time it still uses the existing website on the PAUPortal. In November 2016 Studia Historiae Scientiarum 2016, vol. 15 was issued.

It is outlined the third phase of the development of the journal Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU (Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). In June 2016 Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU 2015, vol. XIV was issued. Following the legal decision with effect from 4 July 2016 the journal, while maintaining the continuity of its publication, has been renamed to Studia Historiae Scientiarum. Since June 2016 the journal has a new website with an editorial panel on the Scientific Journals Portal. At the same time it still uses the existing website on the PAU Portal. In November 2016 Studia Historiae Scientiarum 2016, vol. 15 was issued.

The article presents the fourth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). The sections of the journal were modified, as well as the peer review procedure and the bibliographic style. There has also been an increase in the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the journal.

The article presents the fourth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). The sections of the journal were modified, as well as the peer review procedure and the bibliographic style. There has also been an increase in the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the journal.

The article outlines the fifth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). A new journal website has been created. The information has been provided on the journal indexing and its availability in libraries around the world, the number of foreign authors, and the number of journal reviewers.

The article outlines the fifth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). A new journal website has been created. The information has been provided on the journal indexing and its availability in libraries around the world, the number of foreign authors, and the number of journal reviewers.

The article outlines the sixth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

The information is provided on the following matters: the journal obtaining the award in the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020” (in April 2019), the evaluation of the magazine in “ICI Master Journal List 2017” (published at the end of 2018) and in “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” (published on 31 July 2019), the indexation of the journal in the Scopus database (from September 2019), the implementation of the service Similarity Check (Crossref), the works on updating the journal’s website in OJS (3.1.2.1.), the number of foreign authors and the number of reviewers of the current volume of the journal.

The article outlines the sixth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous namePrace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

The information is provided on the following matters: the journal obtaining the award in the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020” (in April 2019), the evaluation of the magazine in “ICI Master Journal List 2017” (published at the end of 2018) and in “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” (published on 31 July 2019), the indexation of the journal in the Scopus database (from September 2019), the implementation of the service Similarity Check (Crossref), the works on updating the journal’s website in OJS (3.1.2.1), the number of foreign authors and the number of reviewers of the current volume of the journal.

The article outlines the seventh phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

The information is provided on the following matters: the realization of the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020”, the evaluation of the journal in “ICI Master Journal List 2018” (published at the end of 2019), in Scimago Journal Ranks 2019 (published on 11 June 2020), in CWTS Journal Indicators (published on the beginning of June 2020) and in Scopus (published on 6 June 2020), a systemic obstacle in the further developing of the journal related to the journal’s underrated rating in the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” (published on 31 July 2019 and 18 December 2020), the indexation of the journal in the Scopus database (from September 2019), the works on updating the journal’s website in OJS (3.1.2.), and the number of foreign authors and the number of reviewers of the current volume of the journal.

The article outlines the seventh phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

The information is provided on the following matters: the realization of the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020”, the evaluation of the journal in “ICI Master Journal List 2018” (published at the end of 2019), in Scimago Journal Ranks 2019 (published on 11 June 2020), in CWTS Journal Indicators (published on the beginning of June 2020) and in Scopus (published on 6 June 2020), a systemic obstacle in the further developing of the journal related to the journal’s underrated rating in the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” (published on 31 July 2019 and 18 December 2020), the indexation of the journal in the Scopus database (from September 2019), the works on updating the journal’s website in OJS (3.1.2.), and the number of foreign authors and the number of reviewers of the current volume of the journal.

The article outlines the eighth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

Information is provided on the following matters: the journal’s evaluation by the “ICI Master Journal List 2019” (released at the end of 2020), by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Polish Republic (released on February 9 / 18, 2021), by Scopus (released on 6 April 2021), and by the SCImago Journal Rankings 2020 (released on May 17, 2021; unfortunately, the journal data in Scimago website are inconsistent with the Scopus data, e.g. most of the 2020 volume’s citable texts that are indexed in Scopus have been omitted).

Additionally, the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the current volume of the journal is quoted.

From volume 21 (2022), the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum will implement additional organizational solutions: a CC BY license for the texts of articles (retaining the possibility of other licenses for illustrations), the CrossMark service and the publishing option, the so-called FirstView Articles.

Article available under CC BY license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode   

The article outlines the eighth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science).

Information is provided on the following matters: the journal’s evaluation by the “ICI Master Journal List 2019” (released at the end of 2020), by the Ministry of Education and Science of Poland (released on February 9 / 18, 2021), by Scopus (released on 6 April 2021), and by the SCImago Journal Rankings 2020 (released on May 17, 2021; unfortunately, the journal data in Scimago website are inconsistent with the Scopus data, e.g. most of the 2020 volume’s citable texts that are indexed in Scopus have been omitted).

Additionally, the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the current volume of the journal is quoted. From volume 21 (2022), the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum will implement additional organizational solutions: a CC BY license for the texts of articles (retaining the possibility of other licenses for illustrations), the CrossMark service and the publishing option, the so-called FirstView Articles.

Article available under CC BY license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode   

The article is an extended discussion with a laureate of numerous international distinctions, Professor Robert Fox, about his career, intellectual fascinations, as well as changing methods, styles, approaches and themes in the historiography of science and technology.

The article presents an introduction to the topic of the Working Session “Polish scientific journals from disciplines: «history and philosophy of science» and «science of science» –current challenges”organized by the PAU Commission on the History of Sciencein Kraków on 25 June 25 2019, along with specific proposals of organizational and editorial solutions for journals and publishing houses, as well as of legislative solutions regarding the principles of journal evaluation.

The article describes the context and content of the November 1925 correspondence – so far overlooked by historians of physics – between Władysław (Ladislas) Natanson and Alfred Landé on Planck’s law and Bose statistics, and the effects of this interaction.

The article publishes for the first time the transcription of two original letters in German and their translations into English.

Article available under CC BY-NC-ND  license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pl/legalcode   

The article presents a critical review of the form and content of the Polish translation of Hans-Jörg Rheinberger’s book entitled Epistemologia historyczna (Historical epistemology) (Warsaw: Oficyna Naukowa, 2015. Translated [from German] by Jan Surman. ISBN 978-83-64363-20-7, pp. 336), indicating both the substantive advantages of this book and its some (mainly linguistic) shortcomings.

The author, referring to the text of Jan Woleński published on the pages of Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU in 2014, discusses the understanding of the generalized correspondence principle in the context of the following concepts: cumulativism (C.G. Hempel, P. Oppenhaim, E. Nagel), extreme anticumulativism (P. Feyerabend, T.S. Kuhn), dialectical cumulativism (W. Krajewski) and the hypothetico‑ deductive method of correspondence‑oriented thinking as well as Copernicus’s methodology (M. Kokowski).

The author replies to the text entitled “Remarks to the comment by Prof. Michal Kokowski on the research of Jan Czochralski’s biography” by Dr. Paweł E. Tomaszewski (2015), highlighting the key contentious issues, including the need to rely systematically on historical sources and the criticism thereof.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2015/2016. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, administrative-election meetings, new members, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2015/2016. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, administrative-election meetings, new members, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2020/2021. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, seminars, new members and new publications.

Article available under CC BY license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode   

The activity of the PAU Commission on the History of Science in 2021/2022 was discussed.

It presents: a report on the elections of the Board of the Commission and the members of the Commission for the 2021–2024 term of office; the composition of the Board of the Commission and the list of members of the Commission; lists of: scientific meetings, conferences, scientific sessions and seminars as well as new publications.

The article discusses the activities and the most significant achievements of the Science Studies Research Unit at the Institute for the History of Science PAS in 2021. The article focuses on the specificity of the Unit, which proposes both theoretical reflection and practical solutions in the broadly understood field of Science-of-Science and Science and Technology Studies.

The author replies to the letter of Dr. Paweł E. Tomaszewski, which is a subsequent (third) stage of the controversy regarding the facts of life of Jan Czochralski and the differences in the way they are presented by an amateur researcher and a professional historian. The source of the controversy is the biography Powrót. Rzecz o Janie Czochralskim (2012), the English edition: Jan Czochralski restored (2013).

In the opinion of the author, a professional historian of science may have some reservations regarding the sometimes too popular a style of the publications of Dr. Tomaszewski. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that so far this amateur [i.e. enthusiast] of historical research has done much more regarding the biography and achievements of Jan Czochralski than professional historians and historians of science.

This reply concludes the exchange of polemics.

The text presents a selection of bibliography on scientometrics, bibliometrics and informetrics.
The bibliography was chosen in the context of the author’s research of: a) the current debate on scientometrics, bibliometrics and informetrics in Poland, b) the history of these disciplines, and c) the history of the science of science.
This selection has an important advantage because it includes many publications that a) represent the views both of Polish and foreign authors, b) discuss serious methodological limitations of scientometrics, bibliometrics and informetrics and c) show the inseparable connection between the disciplines and the science of science.
This bibliography was already used in two of the author’s articles published in Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU, volume 14 (2015).

The article describes the types of journals from the history of science, the criterion for selecting journals from the history of science, the transparent evaluation criteria of scientific journals adopted in the “List of journals of the Unit for Science of Science and Science Studies at the Institute for History of Science of the Polish Academy of Sciences” (2022) and the scorings of journals from the history of science on the Lists of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland (January 25, 2017), the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Poland (December 21, 2021) and the Unit for Science of Science and Science Studies at the Institute for History of Science of the Polish Academy of Sciences (2022).

Report on the activities of the PAU Commission on the History of Science in 2020/2021

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2020/2021. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, seminars, new members and new publications.

Article available under CC BY license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode   

The article describes the course of the Working Session „Polish scientific journals from the disciplines: «history and philosophy of science» and «science of science» – current challenges” (Kraków, 25 June 2019), organized by the Commission of the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences.

The article presents facts about the hitherto pending “Complaint calling for a correction of the score given to the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum from 20 to 70 points” (of September 9, 2019 and of January 15, 2020) addressed to the Science Evaluation Commission of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Government.

It analyzes publicly available information on the presence of Polish journals on ‘history’, ‘history of science’ and ‘history and philosophy of science’ in indexation databases or journal libraries and their bibliometric indicators. This information is compared with the scoring awarded in the ministerial evaluation of journals in 2019.

Since the ministerial scoring is not related to the actual achievements of the journal of the Commission on the History of Science, Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences, urgent change in the scoring of this journal has been demanded.

This article investigates the forgotten achievements of Władysław Natanson (1864–1937) related to the creation of Bose-Einstein statistics.

The introductory part of the article presents considerations regarding the methodology of history and the history of exact sciences, and then the divergent research perspectives that can be taken in the description of the history of Bose-Einstein statistics, as well as the author’s integrated approach to this issue, which eliminates the disadvantages of these divergent views.

This integrated approach is then used to describe the achievements of Władysław Natanson related to the creation of Bose-Einstein statistics.

These achievements are presented against the background and in the context of discussions which – relatively sporadically – took place among various groups of researchers: historians and philosophers of science, physicists, sociologists of scientific knowledge in the 20^th and 21^st centuries.

These discussions have now been reordered here. They are followed by a presentation of the complete list of Natanson’s publications regarding the subject. Also shown is his strategy to quote reliably the bibliography with regard to the explanation of the distribution of blackbody radiation and related issues.

Additionally, a list of scientists who knew Natanson’s publications has been supplemented in the article and the precursorship of Natanson’s achievements is explained. This is followed by a rebuttal of many erroneous or simplified statements about him and his achievements.

The already well-known terminological conventions have been recalled: “Bose statistics” and “Bose-Einstein statistics”, as well as recently introduced: “Planck-Bose statistics” (1984), “Natanson’s statistics” (1997)”, “Natanson-Bose-Einstein statistics” (2005), “Planck-Natanson-Bose-Einstein statistics” (2011), and “Natanson statistics” (2013).

New terminological conventions have been introduced: “Boltzmann-Planck-Natanson statistics” and “Boltzmann-Planck-Natanson-Bose-Einstein statistics”.

A side effect of this research is a discovery that Robert K. Merton – the author of the label ‘Matthew effect’ – chose the name of the effect using erroneous premises and the effect should therefore be named after its actual discoverer.

The article is accompanied by four appendixes: the first presents reflections on the methodology of historiography and historiography of exact sciences, the second – a commentary on the use of the terms: “Bose statistics”, “Bose-Einstein statistics”, “Einstein-Bose statistics” and “Planck-Bose statistics”, the third – a very important letter by Max Planck to  Władysław Natanson (of 25 January 1913), and the fourth – the excerpts of two letters from Sommerfeld to Rubinowicz (of 1 October 1919 and 1 November 1919).

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2019/2020. It presents the lists of scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2019/2020. It presents the lists of scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2016/2017. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, conferences, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2017/2018. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, new members, new publications, and members who have died.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2017/2018. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, new members, new publications, and members who have died.

Abstract

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2018/2019. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, new members of the Commission, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2018/2019. It presents the lists of: scientific meetings, conferences, symposia, new members of the Commission, and new publications.

The report discusses the activities of the Commission on the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2016/2017. It presents the lists of: scientific meeting, conferences, and new publications.

The article discuses the Bill of 23 March 2017 of the “Directive of the Minister of Science and Higher Education, Republic of Poland, dated ………… 2017”. It indicates serious flaws of this Bill regarding legislation and the science of science (including bibliometrics), and proposes significant amendments to the content of the provisions of this Directive.

The article sketches the subject matter and the course of the first videoconference in the history of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Institute of the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Sciences: “The Polish journals on the history and philosophy of science and the science of science: How to get to Scopus, WoS, ICI, DOAJ and ERIH+. Why is it worth doing?” (Krakow – Warsaw – Toruń, 16 April 2020, 10.00–15.00).

The conference was organized on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Commission on the History of Science at the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences, and to mark the establishment of the Laboratory for the Science of Science at the Institute for the History of Science, Polish Academy of Sciences, currently the only one (!) unit for the science of science in Poland.

The aim of this research study and review article is to examine the scientific basis of scientometrics and bibliometrics, i.e. to show their real “detection and measurement” capabilities. The analysis is conducted from the author’s perspective of the integrated science of science and the history and methodology of the science of science following this perspective. Particular emphasis is placed on the history and methodology of scientometrics and bibliometrics and the history and methodology of science. This perspective is a new approach to the subject matter and determines a) how to select publications and their interpretations and b) which hierarchy the analyzed issues should follow.
The article describes the view, dominant both in the world and in Poland, on the basics of scientometrics and bibliometrics and their numerous serious scientific restrictions, such as: a) the incompatibility of the so‑called scientometric laws and the Garfield law of concentration with the empirical data; b) the domain bias, the language bias and the geographical bias of indexation databases; c) various practices of scientific communication; d) the local (national or state‑ level) orientation of humanities, social sciences and citation indexes; e) the disadvantages of the impact factor (IF), the manipulations with its values and the “impact factor game”; f) the numerous problems with and abuses of citations, e.g. the Mendel syndrome, the “classic” publication bias, the palimpsestic syndrome, the effect of the disappearance of citations, the so‑called Matthew effect, the theft of citations, the so‑called secondary and tertiary citations, negative citations, “fashionable nonsenses”, forced citations, the pathologies of the so‑ called citation cartels or cooperative citations, the guest authorship and the honorable authorship; g) the distinction between the “impact of publication” and the “importance of publication” or the “significance” of publication; h) the effectiveness of indexation of publications in electronic and Internet databases and
the technological modernity of publications. The discovery of such restrictions regarding scientometrics and bibliometrics has led to the creation of, among others, biobibliometrics, alternative metrics (“altmetrics”) and the open science movement.
The analysis of this information results in a general conclusion that is relevant to the current scientific policy in Poland, i.e. it is necessary to resist the “tyranny of bibliometrics”, because it does not serve the development of science. As a consequence, the use of scientometric methods in evaluations of scientific activities should be limited, particularly in the humanities and social sciences.
The article also advocates for implementing the idea, considered as priority, of the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education, which is the promotion of the achievements of Polish humanities and social sciences at home and abroad. In order to achieve this aim, the following is proposed: a) developing the integrated science of science (as protection against the numerous errors of scientometrics and bibliometrics); b) expanding indexation databases of publications, digital libraries and digital repositories; c) intensifying the participation of Polish scientists in international research, including becoming actively involved in the international project aiming at building a European indexation database for humanities and social sciences, d) developing open access to scientific contents and e) modernizing Polish scientific journals and scientific publishing.

The article describes the context and content of the correspondence from November 1925, so far overlooked by physics historians, on the Planck law and the Bose statistics between Władysław (Ladislas) Natanson and Alfred Landé and the effects of this interaction.
The article publishes for the first time the translations from German into Polish of two letters from Natanson and Landé.

Article available under CC BY-NC-ND  license.

License text: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pl/legalcode   

The article presents the results of the evaluation of the Polish journals from the history of science, history, philosophy of science, and science of science, based on the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland 2017 & 2019” and “ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017”. A comment has also been added to these results. The following facts were noted:

a) the fact that there is a negative correlation between the journal’s rating in the “List of journals MNiSW 2019” and the journal’s ratings in the “ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017” for journals from the history and history of science;

b) the fact that the presence of the journal in the DOAJ does not raise the ministerial rating of the journal;

c) the fact that the evaluation of the journal in the Scopus database has not significantly affected the increase in the ministerial rating: the rating depends on the discipline and sub-discipline;

d) the fact that journals from the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020” (WCN 2019–2020) and ERIH+ received 20 to 70 points; their ministerial ratings depend on discipline and sub-discipline.

In addition, it was hoped that for the good of Polish science, some errors of the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” would be removed in a short time, as some magazines received too low marks (this statement results from a comparison of journals’ achievements, including bibliometric indicators).