About the Eternal

...Man by nature is afraid of death, he strives to become immortal...

Man is immortal by nature, but he fears death like a child of darkness. It's like he's some kind of moth that's flying now, but an hour later he's gone. A moth has more reason to be afraid of death than a person - and it turns out the opposite, absurdity, a butterfly is not afraid, but a person is afraid! The fear of death is a child's fear, it is cured by life experience and understanding.

ZIN's Salix storage facility has already been partially moved to the outskirts of the city, but how do employees get there? It is impossible to completely reconstruct the old building - it is a cultural monument. Don't forget that both the Munich and British Museums are museums, not institutes. And ZIN is an institution that is separate from the Zoo Museum, so the issue of storing material already requires a special solution in terms of rates and areas (which are being reduced).

Just the Munich Museum is a purely scientific institution, its collections are put on public display only 2 days a year and employees are terribly disliked these days, because they are obliged to be on duty there and give explanations to the curious public.

Man is immortal by nature, but he fears death like a child of darkness. It's like he's some kind of moth that's flying now, but an hour later he's gone. A moth has more reason to be afraid of death than a person - and it turns out the opposite, absurdity, a butterfly is not afraid, but a person is afraid! The fear of death is a child's fear, which is cured by the experience of life and understanding.

Well, probably everyone understands the incorrectness of comparing a person with a moth in terms of organizing nervous activity. This is not even worth stopping at. And about the statement that the fear of death is a child's fear... I strongly disagree. Only a fool is not afraid of death (sorry for the non-parliamentary statement, it does not belong to me, it is well known, and I am only quoting it). Do not confuse the concepts of "awareness of the inevitability of death" and "fear of death". This fear is natural, inherent in every person, and not to admit it is bravado. Another question is that it is unacceptable to dwell on the fear of death, to allow it to "climb out of all the cracks" of the soul and determine your actions. And the awareness of the inevitability of death is more than useful - thanks to it, you better understand the value of a brief moment of life. How's it going with Nikolai Ostrovsky? Life is given to a person once, and it is necessary to live it in such a way that it is not excruciatingly painful for the aimlessly lived years, so as not to burn the shame for a mean and... so on..


This post was edited by Dmitrich - 06.03.2008 14: 52

Oh...Right now the philosophy will begin. Maybe bude, lads?

IchMan
Yes, you are right, but it is still a very small institution (in terms of research staff). I'm only familiar with the shellfish department (which is very large): there is one full-time researcher (he is also the head of the department). Compare it with ZIN: there are 5 full-time research assistants-malacologists. In general, the Germans were genuinely surprised by the size of the scientific staff in ZINA.

Salix
is now a Zoological Institute and a Zoological Museum - two different institutions, they have different leadership. Yes, they are located in the same building, but if you look at how outdated the definitions of species are on display, it becomes clear that the employees of ZINA live a separate life. Moreover, museum employees are not allowed to engage in scientific work that is not related to museology (by the way, in ZINA for a very long time they were not allowed to engage in science and curators of collections. A friend was taking samples in the ... toilet). The Institute of Oceanology, the Institute of Ecology and Animal Evolution, etc. do not have official museums at all, although they have very large collections. A museum is, of course, a good thing, but it is difficult to engage in science in our museums, and it is difficult to create a full-fledged repository of collections with a staff in institutes. For example, there was a bedbug specialist at one institute, he collected a large collection, supported it, but when he was dismissed, the collection turned out to be abandoned. In a damp climate and an old room, such a collection can suffer greatly in 20-30 years.

Salix
Don't forget that both the Munich and British Museums are museums, not institutes.

About Munich-I don't know, but about "British" - do you happen to confuse Natural History and the British Museum? They are also very geographically divided. As for scientific research, it's strange to comment on it...

IchMan
Yes, you are right, but it is still a very small institution (in terms of research staff). I'm only familiar with the shellfish department (which is very large): there is one full-time researcher (he is also the head of the department). Compare it with ZIN: there are 5 full-time research assistants-malacologists. In general, the Germans were genuinely surprised by the size of the scientific staff in ZINA.

Then compare the Russian Empire (at least within the borders of the USSR) and Bavaria, whose zoo museum is ZSM - there should not be a 5-fold superiority in the state, but an order of magnitude! By phone, this difference between ZIN and ZSM is ~ 2 times. ZIN with its collections is our national treasure (it's a pity that not everyone understands this ) and IMHO, its states should not be set with an eye to the West.

To IchMan:

Yes, it's sad. At the same time, there are several large entomological collections in Germany with a solid scientific staff, Munich is just one of them. And in Russia, ZIN is the only global center. Yes, there are collections in Moscow, Vladivostok and some other cities. But it's all wrong.

Ich Man
I don't argue with this, BUT: how many real zoologists are there in ZINA who are engaged in taxonomy, faunistics and morphology? ZIN is gradually becoming more ecological, etc., and this is reflected in the publications. Now there are collections that do not even have full-time keepers (for example, a huge collection of crustaceans). A specialist leaves and the collection does not just become ownerless (they do not add alcohol, etc.) – it can be transported to Kolomyagi, dumped in a pile and forgotten.
PS Yesterday, at work, under the table by the battery in a dusty box, I accidentally found the holotypes of nematodes lost 8 years ago, which were described by an already deceased specialist. These are dozens of species. A friend told me that in the Paris Museum he found several types of Lamarck in the same way. This is all very, very sad. Much of ZINA is based on the" old men", the keepers of the old school, who do a great job for pennies, and very harmful to health. Moreover, their qualifications are unique. Will they leave and who will stay? One lady, the curator of a huge collection of Zina, having worked ...twelve years old, suddenly asks me: "I don't understand why some species have authors in parentheses and others don't?" (I'm not saying that she just doesn't know how the holotype differs from the syntype).

Salix
's collections of museums in Moscow, Vladivostok, and other cities are already larger than Zinovsky's by individual groups. For example, Zina has an extremely weak collection of ostracods, the largest group of crustaceans. For specialists in legtails or spiders, ZIN has never been a global hub. But, of course, the importance of ZIN is very high, as well as BIN, but in BIN, as it seemed to me, they are more concerned about the safety of collections and are switching to European standards. The former director of ZINA was not a taxonomist, he was not even interested in the collections of the animals he studied. I don't know much about the new director, but since parasitological collections in the USSR were a disaster (many huge collections were lost in peacetime), one can hardly expect a reverent attitude towards the funds. But in our country, everything is determined by the personality of the director, and not by the general policy of the state.

To Juglans:

For individual groups-yes, there are more complete collections. But in general, we have no analogues of ZIN. The criterion here, perhaps, can serve as the number of types stored in the collection.

As for the directors, the current one is also, as far as I know, not a taxonomist. But for directors and heads of departments (heads of departments) it's not important, or even harmful. These are administrative positions to which administrators (managers) should be appointed, whose main task is to create comfortable working conditions for employees, ensure the safety of the collection, etc. Of course, they should more or less understand the specifics of the work. But there is an academic council for solving private scientific and specific issues. In reality, at least the head of the department is usually awarded for scientific achievements. A person can be a manager in no way, all these worries are alien to him and a burden - but no, like this is accepted.