Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

struggle4progress

(118,032 posts)
Wed Feb 6, 2013, 11:34 AM Feb 2013

German science minister stripped of her PhD

06 Feb 2013 | 09:21 GMT | Posted by Quirin Schiermeier | Category: Policy

In a move likely to have major political implications, the University of Düsseldorf has revoked the doctoral degree of Germany’s science and education minister, Annette Schavan.

A university committee yesterday evening confirmed accusations, first aired last May, of plagiarism in Schavan’s ethical-philosophical dissertation entitled ‘People and conscience — studies on the conditions, necessity and requirements for formation of conscience today’ ...

In her 1980 thesis, Schavan “systematically and deliberately claimed as her own intellectual achievements which she had in fact not produced herself,” said Bruno Bleckmann, dean of philosophy and chairman of the 15-head committee, in a statement. The committee voted with large majority that Schavan’s PhD degree should be withdrawn ...

Schavan is the second minister in Angela Merkel’s cabinet to fall from academic grace. Merkel’s former defence minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, resigned last year after the University of Bayreuth stripped him of his doctorate. Zu Guttenberg had plagiarized extended sections of his 2006 law thesis ...

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2013/02/german-science-stripped-of-her-phd.html

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
1. As it should be. Academic freedom does not mean freedom from integrity and responsibility.
Wed Feb 6, 2013, 11:53 AM
Feb 2013

One wonders why her examining committee missed this. Perhaps they didn't....

hunter

(38,264 posts)
2. I wonder if more powerful search engines and expanded electronic libraries are catching people up?
Wed Feb 6, 2013, 03:39 PM
Feb 2013

It's always funny to me when I search old slash fiction on the internet. Sometimes several people will be claiming authorship of a story, none of them people I was with while they were writing it, most often not on a computer but by hand or on a typewriter...

Many of these stories first circulated as bad Xeroxes and Mimeographs and were first uploaded to BBSs and the internet years after they were written.


Jim__

(14,045 posts)
3. Interesting. Oliver Sachs has an article in the current New York Review of Books on memory ...
Wed Feb 6, 2013, 03:40 PM
Feb 2013

and its possible role in plagiarism. An excerpt:

...

Sometimes these forgettings extend to autoplagiarism, where I find myself reproducing entire phrases or sentences as if new, and this may be compounded, sometimes, by a genuine forgetfulness. Looking back through my old notebooks, I find that many of the thoughts sketched in them are forgotten for years, and then revived and reworked as new. I suspect that such forgettings occur for everyone, and they may be especially common in those who write or paint or compose, for creativity may require such forgettings, in order that one’s memories and ideas can be born again and seen in new contexts and perspectives.

Webster’s defines “plagiarize” as “to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own: use (another’s production) without crediting the source …to commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.” There is a considerable overlap between this definition and that of “cryptomnesia.” The essential difference is that plagiarism, as commonly understood and reprobated, is conscious and intentional, whereas cryptomnesia is neither. Perhaps the term “cryptomnesia” needs to be better known, for though one may speak of “unconscious plagiarism,” the very word “plagiarism” is so morally charged, so suggestive of crime and deceit, that it retains a sting even if it is “unconscious.”

In 1970, George Harrison composed an enormously successful song, “My Sweet Lord,” which turned out to have great similarities to a song by Ronald Mack (“He’s So Fine”), recorded eight years earlier. When the matter went to trial, the judge found Harrison guilty of plagiarism, but showed psychological insight and sympathy in his summary of the case. He concluded:

Did Harrison deliberately use the music of “He’s So Fine”? I do not believe he did so deliberately. Nevertheless…this is, under the law, infringement of copyright, and is no less so even though subconsciously accomplished.


Helen Keller was accused of plagiarism when she was only twelve.2 Though deaf and blind from an early age, and indeed languageless before she met Annie Sullivan at the age of six, she became a prolific writer once she learned finger spelling and Braille. As a girl, she had written, among other things, a story called “The Frost King,” which she gave to a friend as a birthday gift. When the story found its way into print in a magazine, readers soon realized that it bore great similarities to “The Frost Fairies,” a children’s short story by Margaret Canby. Admiration for Keller now turned into accusation, and Helen was accused of plagiarism and deliberate falsehood, even though she said that she had no recollection of reading Canby’s story, and thought she had made it up herself. The young Helen was subjected to a ruthless inquisition, which left its mark on her for the rest of her life.

more ...


I'm not sure if any of this relates to Schavan's PhD thesis; but it sounds like "plagiarism" can be an honest mistake.

hunter

(38,264 posts)
5. For all of human history this innate ability to repeat songs and stories was a positive thing...
Thu Feb 7, 2013, 01:54 PM
Feb 2013

... until we started buying and selling "intellectual property."

Before written languages were developed, all stories, songs, and other creative works persisted only in human memory. Any memory-only creative works not passed on to younger generations were lost.

I'm a very strong supporter of attribution, I think it's a basic human right to be recognized for one's own creative works (if one so desires) but it's not clear to me that our current system of intellectual property is beneficial to human society in the final accounting.

We need to develop a system that recognizes and rewards superstars like J.K. Rowling or the Beatles, but doesn't grind up, abuse, and steal from artists, or create synthetic scarcities for the benefit of a few but to the detriment of society in general.

I've had a couple of bitter experiences where my own art was compartmentalized as intellectual property or original academic work and used by others for their own advancement -- rather like selling a song that later goes platinum for a hundred dollars and a hot meal. There are sharks roaming these oceans and intellectual property is their meat.

It's not in me to become a shark myself, but I don't want to feed the sharks either. That's one reason I now use GPL, Creative Commons, and similar licenses in my own work. I also avoid buying anything from sharks as best I can, but I'm not really consistent about that, I use Debian rather than Microsoft or Apple software, I request generic prescriptions whenever possible, my wife and I buy much of the art in our lives directly from the artists and musicians, but we also like going to the movies and watching DVDs even though the entertainment industry is populated by some of the bigger meaner sharks around.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»German science minister s...