Sou
Professor Catedrático na Universidade de Barcelona, e
Catedrático Convidado desde 2012 na Universidade de
Lisboa. Seguindo a sugestão
de colegas da UL, submeti recentemente um projecto à FCT.
Este projecto foi
rejeitado com a pior e mais vergonhosa avaliação que
recebi na minha vida
académica. Sinto-me insultado, mas, pior, tenho pena dos
meus colegas
portugueses. Compreendo porque apesar da competência e
qualificações que têm,
lhes tem sido tão difícil progredir como conseguimos fazer
em Barcelona nos últimos
anos.
Vou
pôr a modéstia de parte. Sou um filósofo reconhecido
internacionalmente. Convidam-me regularmente para
conferências, sou membro da
Academia Europea, sou avaliador em várias agências
europeias, e pertenço a um
dos painéis do European Research Council (ERC). Publiquei
e publico
regularmente nos 10 melhores periódicos de filosofia, e na
Oxford University
Press, a editorial mais prestigiosa para a filosofia.
Liderei único grupo de
filosofia (e dos poucos das humanidades) a conseguir um
projecto
CONSOLIDER-INGENIO em Espanha.
Também liderei a primeira
rede europeia de
filosofia a ser premiada com uma rede internacional Marie
Curie (ITN)
financiada pela Comissão Europeia, com universidades em 6
países diferentes
(Reino Unido, Suíça, Hungria, Suécia, França e Espanha).
Principalmente, criei
em meados dos anos 90 o grupo de filosofia LOGOS,
baseado na
Universidade de Barcelona, que contribuiu a que a
Universidade de Barcelona
esteja entre as 50 melhores do mundo na área da filosofia
(de acordo com o
ranking QS
University
Rankings 2015 - Philosophy), e que Espanha esteja em
9º lugar no
ranking
de países em filosofia.
O
projecto que preparei para a FCT é sobre a primeira
pessoa. Tenho estado a trabalhar neste tema, e já posso
oferecer significados
relevantes da investigação que pretendo levar a cabo com a
equipa do projecto.
Editei um livro sobre o tema com contribuições dos
investigadores mais
relevantes, About Ourselves, que será
publicado em Janeiro de 2016 na Oxford University Press,
incluindo um artigo meu.
A revista Synthese (entre as melhores
de filosofia) acaba de publicar outro artigo meu sobre a
primeira-pessoa. O
"Oxford Handbooks Online" publicará em breve um texto meu
sobre o tema.
Com
base nestes dados, e do projecto ele mesmo, qualquer
avaliador
com conhecimento de causa teria dito que o projecto
submetido produziria
resultados semelhantes: conferências internacionais
influentes, talvez algum
livro, vários artigos nas melhores revistas, actividades
de divulgação, etc.
Motivos suficientes, na minha experiência, para financiar
o projecto, ou pelo
menos para o incluir entre a lista dos pré-seleccionados,
se os fundos
disponíveis só permitirem financiar alguns projectos
(teríamos de ver como se
compararão os projectos financiados com respeito aos
resultados expectáveis,
como as publicações.)
Em vez
disso, o projecto foi avaliado com um 5, a nota
mais baixa entre as avaliações a que tive acesso. A única
razão para esta nota
(a única crítica que pude vislumbrar) é que “o estado da
arte identifica o
problema apenas a partir de Frege. Isto é insuficiente. O
problema com referência
à primeira pessoa é discutido em filosofia de Descartes a
Derrida com Kant,
Hegel, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Husserl, Heidegger e
Merlau-Ponty como as suas
estações principais.”
Isto é
simplesmente estúpido. É tão estúpido como recusar
financiar um projecto em física ou economia porque não se
relaciona com o
trabalho de Aristóteles, Newton, Adam Smith ou Ricardo. A
filosofia não difere
da física ou da economia, pelo menos o tipo de filosofia
que eu, e que os
investigadores em Oxford, Cambridge, Stanford, Harvard,
Berkeley, etc., fazemos
não é diferente. Identificamos um problema na fronteira da
investigação,
formulamos uma hipótese original e a metodologia adequada
para lidar com ela.
Não precisamos de percorrer toda a história da filosofia.
Naturalmente, existem
filósofos com opiniões diferentes sobre como fazer
filosofia. Não tenho nenhum
problema com isso, ou com o financiamento dos seus
projectos. Mas não nos podem
impor a sua opinião – principalmente quando essa opinião
não representa os
departamentos de filosofia das melhores universidades do
mundo. Isso não seria
estúpido, seria incúria interesseira.
Seja
qual for a razão que levou a esta avaliação, a
estupidez ou a incúria, penso que a FCT deveria fazer algo
sobre o assunto. E
farei tudo o que estiver ao meu alcance para que os meus
colegas em posições
académicas influentes saibam o que os filósofos
contemporâneos podem esperar da
FCT.
Cumprimentos,
Manuel Garcia-Carpintero
English version:
I am a Professor at
the University of
Barcelona. Since 2012, I
am also an invited
Professor (Catedrático
convidado) at the
University of Lisbon.
Following suggestions by
my colleagues at the
group LANCOG (http://www.lancog.com/),
to which I belong, I
recently submitted a
project for funding to
FCT. The project has
been rejected, with the
worst and most shameful
evaluation I have
received in my whole
academic life. I feel
insulted, but mostly I
feel very sorry for my
Portuguese colleagues.
Now I understand why, in
spite of their amazing
competence and
qualifications, it has
been so difficult for
them to achieve what we
have here in Barcelona.
With a research council
that uses evaluators of
this kind, our group LOGOS
would certainly not
exist now.
I will put modesty
aside. I am an
internationally
respected philosopher, I
am regularly invited to
give keynote addresses
to the best conferences
in our field. I am a
member of Academia
Europaea (http://www.ae-info.org/).
I am asked to do peer
reviewing for many
international research
councils, for tenure
promotions at the most
prestigious US
universities, to be at
committees for PhD
dissertations in the UK
and in many other
European countries.
Currently I am a member
of one of the panels
that evaluates the
Advanced Grants of the
ERC. I have published,
and regularly publish
articles in the top 10
journals in the field,
with rates of acceptance
below 5%. I have a
forthcoming book with
Oxford University Press,
and I have edited five
other books for OUP, the
most prestigious in
contemporary philosophy,
in addition to several
others. I was the PI of
the only philosophy
group (and one of the
only three in the
humanities) to obtain a
prestigious
CONSOLIDER-INGENIO
project, 2.000.000€,
from the Spanish
research council. I was
the PI of the
coordinating university
of the first philosophy
team to be awarded a
Marie Curie
International Training
Network, 1.500.000€,
leading seven
universities, in the UK,
Switzerland, Hungary,
Sweden, France and
Spain. Most of all, I
created in the mid-90s
the group LOGOS (http://www.ub.edu/grc_logos/)
at the University of
Barcelona, which has
attracted many
international
researchers and trained
first-class
philosophers, employed
by different
international
universities, and which
is mainly responsible
for the Philosophy
Department of the
University of Barcelona
being one of the very
few Spanish universities
among the 50 best
departments in the world
in international
rankings in their fields
(the QS University
Rankings by subject for
2015 - Philosophy)
The project I
submitted to FCT was
about the first person.
I have recently been
working on that topic,
and, as I indicated in
the submission, I can
already mention
significant results
related to what I said I
wanted to investigate
with my team for that
project. Thus, a book I
edit on the topic, with
contributions from the
most important
researchers working on
it, and resulting from a
conference I organized
in 2012, "About
Ourselves", will come
out in January 2016,
published by OUP, with a
paper by me. Another
paper I have written on
the topic has just come
out in Synthese, one of
the top 10 journals in
philosophy. I have
written an introduction
to the issue for the
influential "Oxford
Handbooks Online", which
will come out in a few
weeks.
On the basis of all
of this, plus the
project itself, any
knowledgeable peer would
have said that something
similar to this could be
expected from the
project we submitted:
namely, influential
international
workshops/seminars, from
which some published
collections could be
expected, perhaps some
book, plus articles in
top journals and
outreach activities.
I.e., something quite
enough, in my
experience, to award it;
or at least for it to
make it to the final
shortlist, if funds were
very scarce and only a
few projects were
awarded. (But we should
need to see how the
awarded projects in the
field compare on the
scores I have mentioned,
in particular from how
many of them one could
expect publications in
OUP or articles in the
top 10 philosophy
journals.)
Instead of this, the
project was marked with
a 5, the smallest of
those whose evaluations
I have seen (also
submitted by LANCOG, and
also in the end rejected
with inadmissible
reasons, even if not as
outrageous). The only
reason why it received
this mark (the only
criticism one could find
in the review) was that
"The state of the art
traces this problem back
at most to Frege. This
is insufficient. The
problem with reference
to a first person
starting point in
philosophy has been
discussed from Descartes
to Derrida with Kant,
Hegel, Kierkegaard,
Nietzsche, Husserl,
Heidegger and
Merleau-Ponty as its
main stations." This is
simply stupid. It is as
stupid as if a project
in physics or economics
were not granted because
it does not properly
relate to the work of
Aristotle, Newton, Adam
Smith or Ricardo.
Philosophy is not
different from physics
or economics, at least
the kind of philosophy
that we (and researchers
in Oxford, Cambridge,
Stanford, Harvard,
Berkeley, and so on and
so forth) do is not
different. We just
identify a problem in
the frontiers of
research, and state an
original hypothesis and
an adequate methodology
to deal with it. We do
not need to cover the
whole history of the
discipline. Of course,
there are other
philosophers who have
different opinions about
how research in the
discipline should be
conducted. I am happy if
they are allowed to
proceed with their
activities, and if some
of their projects are
awarded. But they cannot
impose their views on us
– one, moreover, which
is not represented at
the philosophy
departments of the best
universities in the
world. That would not be
stupid, it would be
interested malpractice.
So, whatever reason
explains why I had to
suffer this evaluation,
stupidity or
malpractice, I think you
should do something
about it. In any case, I
will do all that is in
my power to let my
colleagues at the most
influential positions in
Academia know how
contemporary
philosophers can expect
to be treated by the
FCT.
Yours sincerely,
Manuel
García-Carpintero
email: m.garciacarpintero@ub.edu, LOGOS Website: <http://www.ub.es/grc_logos/>
email: m.garciacarpintero@ub.edu, LOGOS Website: <http://www.ub.es/grc_logos/>
