{"id":862,"date":"2011-02-01T18:23:49","date_gmt":"2011-02-01T18:23:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/phaidon.philo.at\/qu\/?p=862"},"modified":"2018-11-20T08:43:27","modified_gmt":"2018-11-20T08:43:27","slug":"job-security-in-budapest-two-letters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/?p=862","title":{"rendered":"Job security in Budapest. Two letters"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

J\u00e1nos Boros, Director of the Institute of Philosophy at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, has been named in Laszlo Tengelyi’s open letter<\/a> as responsible for the dismissal of a number of philosophers at his institution. The letter, furthermore, suggested a close connection between these decisions and the more recent debate about the new Hungarian media law and the Orban government in general. Boros has replied to Tengelyi’s remarks in a letter that has yesterday become available to non-Hungarian readers.<\/p>\n

Statement Boros (German and English)<\/a><\/p>\n

Boros makes some important points:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Certain members of the institute were demonstrably unqualified for the job they were holding<\/li>\n
  2. He had been appointed before<\/em> the spring elections 2010<\/li>\n
  3. He is in no way responsible for the actions taken by Gyula Budai in investigating the embattled six philosophy projects of which just one was granted to the Academy institute (and finished before his appointment)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Point (1) seems to have some validity. I have not seen the CVs of the persons fired, but I assume that Boros does not make up the cases he mentions. Point (2) is also correct, but has to be put into perspective. J\u00f3zsef P\u00e1link\u00e1s<\/a>, president of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, has been minister of education in the first Orban administration. The appointment of J\u00e1nos Boros was due to him, against the majority of the members of the Institute.<\/p>\n

    Point (3) is the most contentious one and Tengelyi addresses it in a reply, dated 2011.01.30:<\/p>\n

    Tengelyis Antwort auf Boros (German)<\/a><\/p>\n

    Tengelyi’s reply (English)<\/a><\/p>\n

    The following circumstances deserve to be mentioned:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The conflict concerning Boros’ appointment and the discovery of alleged shortcomings in the one philosophy project granted to the Academy predates the Budai investigations<\/li>\n
    2. This internal conflict was gladly taken up and enhanced by Gyula Budai in his more encompassing campaign against irksome philosophers<\/li>\n
    3. Instead of calling for restraint (let alone defend fellow philosophers) J\u00e1nos Boros was clearly siding with the disproportionate public campaign orchestrated by Gyula Budai and “Magyar Nemzet”<\/li>\n
    4. Which is not really surprising given the bitter infight preceding his appointment\n <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      J\u00e1nos Boros, Director of the Institute of Philosophy at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, has been named in Laszlo Tengelyi’s open letter as responsible for the dismissal of a number of philosophers at his institution. The letter, furthermore, suggested a close connection between these decisions and the more recent debate about the new Hungarian mediaRead more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[142,147],"class_list":["post-862","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-hochschulpolitik","tag-politik","tag-protest"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/862","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=862"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/862\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2315,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/862\/revisions\/2315"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=862"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=862"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quatsch.philo.at\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=862"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}