Abstract
Despite the fact that institutes for advanced study (IASs) have been part of the academic landscape for almost a century, they remain relatively unknown to the general public and even to the scholarly community. To a certain extent they have themselves to blame for this obscurity. They are associated with retreat, withdrawal from the daily routine and concentrated, uninterrupted work. They are wary of the limelight and operate mostly behind the scenes. Not surprisingly, their purpose and function are often misunderstood. The claim to be performing “advanced study” creates the impression of superiority, and the strict selection process of fellows increases the suspicion that they are exclusive clubs accessible to only a privileged minority. In view of the economic and social challenges of our time, can it be justified to allocate scarce resources for research just for the sake of research? Are these institutions not just a form of elitist luxury or are they indeed incubators of science?
These questions call for a critical examination of the origin of the idea of an “institute for advanced study”, their goals and distinctive mode of operation, their relationship with the rest of the research community, their core values and own distinctive ethos and, finally, their potential contribution to the advancement of science. This analysis relies on the history and experience of these institutions in various parts of the world and, more particularly, of the Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study (STIAS).
Origins
The first IAS was established in 1930 in Princeton. It started not as a scientific enterprise, but as a prime example of charitable giving. The Bamberger family, owners of a chain of retail stores in New Jersey, wanted to fund a new medical school in Newark, but Abraham Flexner, a renowned educationist, convinced them to support a new kind of institution which would be totally dedicated to basic research. Princeton also benefited from the exodus of prominent Jewish scientists from Germany and Eastern Europe after Hitler assumed power in 1933. Many of them found a home at the IAS, among them Albert Einstein, the Institute’s most famous Fellow.
Princeton set the tone for similar institutes which followed in Stanford (1954), the Hague (1970), Raleigh, NC (1979), Berlin (1981), Uppsala (1985) and elsewhere. In 1999, STIAS was established as the first IAS in Africa. In 2018 it was invited to become the tenth member of SIAS, a select group of leading IASs.
Relationship with universities and the wider research community
IASs function in a symbiotic relationship with universities and the intellectual environment which the latter provide. The relationship varies from being an inherent part of a specific university (the so-called university-based institutes) to being totally independent institutions like Princeton. STIAS followed a unique course: Although it was founded by Stellenbosch University, the intention right from the beginning was to develop it as an independent institute in service of the whole country and the continent. In 2009 STIAS was registered as a Public Benefit Organisation (PBO) with its own board of directors.
Core values and their implementation
These institutes, despite the fact that they differ in many respects, are all driven by a set of core values, of which the following are the most important:
Freedom. Freedom of inquiry is such a basic value in the scientific enterprise that it may seem strange to emphasise it in this regard. The reality is that there is an inherent tension between the expectations society has of universities and the way these institutions themselves understand their scientific responsibility. Universities are increasingly under pressure to take over roles which are not part of their core function and which in many cases are the responsibility of the state. Consequently the freedom with regard to the issues to be examined, the questions asked, the presuppositions involved, the methodology used, and the expected outcomes are being constantly eroded. Here IASs play an important complementary role to safeguard the freedom of research. As custodians of “creatives spaces for the mind” they encourage innovative thinking and the search for alternative solutions.
Crossing borders. IASs operate on the edges of existing knowledge. Taking the known as given, they venture into uncharted territory and focus on experimental work which has the potential to break new ground. The crossing of borders also relates to the traditional barriers between disciplines, which can have a fragmenting effect on the search for new knowledge. Often the most interesting developments are to be found in the gaps between disciplines. Furthermore, the complexity of contemporary reality makes a single-discipline approach increasingly untenable. Most IASs therefore support interdisciplinary research. STIAS is unique in this respect, however, in so far as it caters for all disciplines and has developed a novel interdisciplinary approach. Instead of relying on generalists, it looks for the leading specialists in a specific field, but who have the ability to relate and share their work with leading scientists in other fields. The crossing of borders also implies the subversion of hierarchies and a certain “democratisation” of the academic process. What counts is not title or position, but the quality of ideas and the persuasive power of evidence and argument.
Incompleteness. One of the consequences of an interdisciplinary approach is the acceptance of the incompleteness of the insights of a single discipline or of an individual researcher. In this respect, science mirrors the incompleteness of the human condition. This provides the basis for constructive cooperation, or what Nyamnjoh (2015, in Journal of African and Asian Studies) calls “convivial scholarship” which displays diversity, tolerance, trust, equality, inclusiveness and interdependence in the scientific endeavour. In his own words: “With convivial scholarship, there are no final answers,. Only permanent questions and ever exciting new angles of questioning.”
Inclusiveness. The crossing of borders and the realisation of the limitations of individual knowledge has as counterpart a holistic, inclusive approach. IASs are therefore not champions of a specific school, paradigm or research tradition. All voices should be heard, all alternatives considered. This inclusiveness does not imply that “everything goes”. Access to the scientific process implies exposure to rigorous critique by peers and fellow researchers. An inclusive approach provides the best defence against the charge of elitism. These institutes do not only honour “liberal values”, but also offer a platform for engaging with “radical values”. The involvement of STIAS in the ongoing debate on the epistemologies of the “north” and the ”south”, decolonisation and revision of curricula is a case in point. It provides a safe environment where voices of all persuasions can be heard and engage in vigorous debate.
Public benefit. Given the concentrated focus on basic research, “public benefit” seems far removed from the world of IASs. Nonetheless, there is a close historical and philosophical link between the two. As already pointed out, the establishment of the first IAS was inspired by charitable giving, the desire to do something for the wellbeing of society. Philosophically, it relates to the issue of fundamental accountability. IASs will be tolerated and granted their freedom only if in the end they demonstrate their value to society. STIAS is registered as a PBO as a matter of conviction and combines “research on the highest level on issues of the highest relevance for society” according to its mission statement.
From these core values a very distinctive ethos developed in an organic way. It becomes visible in unobtrusive ways: the “loss” of titles for the duration of a fellowship, offices of equal size and equipment, optimising opportunities for interaction (one coffee machine, no obligations save to attend lunch and present a seminar), respect for privacy and the different working habits of fellows, and assuring a neutral and “safe” space for discussion and debate.
Importance and contribution
Are IASs worth their salt? These facilities no doubt run the risk of becoming comfort zones, of being perceived as a reward after a strenuous career, or an end in itself. It must also be conceded that in many of the institutions which claim the title of being an IAS, the flag does not cover the cargo.
At the same time, the enormous contribution in terms of groundbreaking research over many decades by the group of leading IASs cannot be denied. The increase of the research output of the home universities of fellows (and indirectly the quality of their teaching) is likewise well documented. But there are also less tangible and quantifiable benefits – the enrichment and deepening of thought, the discovery of new insights, the confrontation with other disciplines, methods and concepts, the broadening of horizons, the challenge to think differently – these are the recurring themes in the exit reports of fellows.
However, the precondition is that IASs remain faithful to their mission and implement their ethos diligently. Critical thinking – not only with regard to the scientific enterprise, but also with regard to IASs themselves and their way of operating – remains a permanent obligation.
Keywords: institutes for advanced study; research institutions; innovative and creative thinking; knowledge production; epistemology; key values; ethos; a creative space for the mind; Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study; STIAS
Lees die volledige artikel in Afrikaans
Institute vir gevorderde navorsing: Elitistiese luuksheid of bakermat van die wetenskap?