Social Responsibilities: A Preliminary Inquiry into the Perspectives of Scientists, Engineers and Health Professionals (original) (raw)
Related papers
Academic and social responsibility of scientists
‘Science Agenda – Framework for Action’, a document endorsed at the International Council for Science (ICSU) and UNESCO’s ’World Conference on Science’ in 1999, recommends that ‘the basic ethical principles and responsibilities of science’ be an integral part of the education and training of all scientists and engineers. However, within this document it is not clearly defined what exactly is to be understood by the phrase ‘the basic ethical principles and responsibilities of science’. The aim of this article is to characterise a possible meaning of this phrase, emphasising the academic and social responsibility of individual scientists and engineers. In doing so, a model is presented and used. The model suggests that the ethics of science concerns three interacting levels: a normative level where ethical principles of science are set up, discussed, and justified; an individual level where the ethical principles are translated into responsible actions of individual scientists and eng...
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SCIENTIST TO SOCIETY -- AN ETHICAL AND FUNCTIONAL DILEMMA
As our society grows ever more complex and technologically based, science is exerting growing influence on our lives. The amazing scientific discoveries of the last hundred years have been turned over to corporate managers, politicians, and government officials as representatives of society. Many of these had no understanding of the potential long-range consequences of their uses of the new technologies resulting from scientific discoveries. We are now having to confront some of the devastating consequences of societal misuses of science and technology. The subject of scientific responsibility has therefore become crucially important to the viability of our earthly life-support systems and the general public welfare. How should the scientist be involved in these issues? What is the responsibility of the scientist for the societal misuse of his scientific discoveries and the technological uses of those discoveries? A system is proposed whereby the scientific professional societies can help scientists assess potential consequences of scientific research and develop alternative responses for dealing with adverse effects. Scientists are called upon to speak out on matters within their expertise where they see dangerous activities being pursued as a policy by governments, corporations, and citizens.
Social responsibility of science
Journal of Education Culture and Society, 2019
This article tackles the problem of social involvement by academics and researchers. The author defines social responsibility widely as the involvement of knowledge, academics and educational institutions in solving the problems of the local community. The concept predicts that this can come about not only by disseminating research results, but also by involvement in pro-social activity without loss of autonomy. The author shows that this can be a way of building trust in science, as well as being a tool in opposing the anti-science culture. It can also be a means of rebuilding the status of science in a world of information bubbles and fake news.
Mapping Social Responsibility in Science
This article employs the Foucauldian notion of 'political rationality' to map discussions and ideals about the responsibility of science toward society. By constructing and analyzing an archive of 263 journal papers, four political rationalities were identified: the Demarcation rationality, which aims to exclude the social from the scientific production in order to make it objective and thereby responsible; the Reflexivity rationality, which sees it as science's responsibility to let itself be guided by problems in society in choice of research focus and methods; the Contribution rationality, which insists that responsible science should live up to public demands for innovation and democracy; and the Integration rationality, which advocates that science should be co-constructed with societal actors in order to be socially responsible. While each rationality is distinct, the article argues that all of them address the issue of a boundary (or integration) between science and society. Hence, it is not possible for scientists to avoid 'a relationship' with society. The political question is how this relationship is to be defined and regulated.
Scientific Freedom and Social Responsibility
Science, Freedom, and Democracy, 2021
Recent statements of the responsibilities of scientists have strengthened the responsibilities of scientists towards the societies in which they pursue their research. Scientists are now expected to do more than treat their experimental subjects ethically and communicate their results. They are also expected to benefit humanity. In a shift from the predominant views of the second half of the 20th century, social responsibility is now yoked to the freedom to pursue scientific research, rather than opposed to such freedom. First I will describe this change and some of its causes. Then I will address the fact that much of our institutional research oversight infrastructure was put in place with a now-outdated understanding of the societal responsibilities and freedoms of scientists. Finally, I will make some recommendations on how to shift the structures we have to be more in tune with the current conceptualization of scientific freedom and social responsibility.
The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science
Accountability in research, 2015
Social responsibility is an essential part of the responsible conduct of research that presents difficult ethical questions for scientists. Recognizing one's social responsibilities as a scientist is an important first step toward exercising social responsibility, but it is only the beginning, since scientists may confront difficult value questions when deciding how to act responsibly. Ethical dilemmas related to socially responsible science fall into at least three basic categories: 1) dilemmas related to problem selection, 2) dilemmas related to publication and data sharing, and 3) dilemmas related to engaging society. In responding to these dilemmas, scientists must decide how to balance their social responsibilities against other professional commitments and how to avoid compromising their objectivity. In this article, we will examine the philosophical and ethical basis of social responsibility in science, discuss some of the ethical dilemmas related to exercising social res...
2008
Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.
The moral responsibilities of scientists (tensions between autonomy and responsibility)
American Philosophical Quarterly, 2003
There are two fundamental bases for the moral responsibilities of scientists: role responsibilities and general responsibilities. Scientists have role responsibilities that come with being a scientist; these include the burdens of governance in the scientific community and upholding the ethical standards internal to science. The role that scientists play, however, does not shield them from the general moral responsibilities that we all share. Of particular importance to scientists are the responsibilities not to be reckless or negligent, i.e. not to ignore or fail to reflect on the risks inherent in scientific research for society at large. These general responsibilities take on an increased urgency given the potentially widespread impact of scientific work. If scientists choose to neglect these responsibilities, they must be taken up by others, thus threatening the scientists’ autonomy.