1. The Need of New Approaches - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
“guardians” also see no reason for revision. After the submission and distribution of our documentation, the time
for such happy unawareness is over. None of the decision-makers and opinion-formers can in future claim to have
been uninformed with respect to the violation of basic rights in the field of academic physics. With this,
developments have taken a forward step in the last two years.”
315 / 2003-11-15 - P. M. PETER MOOSLEITNERS INTERESSANTES MAGAZIN, Editorial Office. München.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
Extract:
“Dear Sir/Madam
In view of the commitment of your magazine to an open dialogue in theoretical physics and thereby for
scientific freedom in the Federal Republic of Germany, as demonstrated by your discussion of the book by G.
Galeczki and P. Marquardt, we hereby allow ourselves to draw your attention to our above-mentioned documentation,
which proves the abolition of scientific freedom in the field of theoretical physics since approx. 1922. Nothing in
this situation has altered since the coming into force of the German Constitution, in which scientific freedom to
research and to teach is, after all, supposedly established as a basic right.”
316 / 2003-11-15 - Magazine PHILOSOPHIA NATURALIS, Editorial Office. Verlag Klostermann. Frankfurt a. M.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
317 / 2003-11-15 - Magazine SCHEIDEWEGE, Editorial Office. Baiersbronn.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
318 / 2003-11-15 - Magazine SKEPTIKER, Andreas Kamphuis. Bergisch-Gladbach.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
319 / 2003-11-15 - News Magazine DER SPIEGEL, Science Editor. Hamburg.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
Extract:
“Dear Sir/Madam
Having already sent you a copy (no. 014) of the above-mentioned documentation in December 2001, today we
are pleased to send you, as a supplement, the first report on the research project. (...)
Recently the feuilletons in German newspapers have seen the freedom of the arts as being endangered as a
result of court decisions on two novels, and have committedly engaged themselves on behalf of the freedom of the
arts. Whereas in the case of the arts the matter at least had to do with court decisions in keeping with orderly public
proceedings with the possibility of revision by the higher courts, the suppression of the freedom to research and to
teach in the field of theoretical physics has not been decided by a court ruling, but by decision and abuse of office
of the academic powers that be. And this is something that has not taken place publicly, but in secret, unnoticed by
the public and supposedly unnoticed by the appointed “guardians” of public welfare, which is why the public and
the “guardians” also see no reason for revision. After the submission and distribution of our documentation, the
time for such happy unawareness is over. None of the decision-makers and opinion-formers can in future claim to
have been uninformed with respect to the violation of basic rights in the field of academic physics. With this,
developments have taken a forward step in the last two years.”
320 / 2003-11-16 - FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, Editorial Office. Frankfurt a. M.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
320a / 2003-11-16 - FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, Editorial Office / Features, Patrick Bahners.
Frankfurt a. M. STR Research Report, Nov. 03
321 / 2003-11-16 - Zeitschrift STERN, Editorial Office. Hamburg.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
322 / 2003-11-16 - SÜDWESTRUNDFUNK / FERNSEHEN, Fields of Culture, Science. Baden-Baden.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
323 / 2003-11-16 - SÜDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG, Editorial Office. München.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
324 / 2003-11-16 - DER TAGESSPIEGEL, Editor in Chief Giovanni di Lorenzo. Berlin.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
325 / 2003-11-16 - DIE TAGESZEITUNG, Editorial Office. Berlin.
STR Research Report, Nov. 03
68
G. O. Mueller: STR 2012