科学家道德责任.ppt

《科学家道德责任.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《科学家道德责任.ppt（32页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、科学家道德责任 Still waters run deep.流静水深流静水深,人静心深人静心深 Where there is life,there is hope。有生命必有希望。有生命必有希望IntroductionScience and technology provide many morally good outcomes for humanityBut,S&T are also causal antecedents of looming global crises morally bad outcomes either accidentally,incidentally,or mal

2、evolently(Small&Jollands,2006)Promethean technology use depends on full range of human nature(Small&Jollands,2006)In an age of Promethean technologies,what are the moral responsibilities of science and scientists to societyResearch AimTo investigate scientists attitudes and beliefs about their moral

3、 responsibilities to society with regard to scientific research and technological developmentMethodUnstructured interviewsResearch approved by UoW ethics committeeInformed consent,signed by participantsFace-to-face interviews 1-2 hours,conducted in participants work offices Both interviewee and inte

4、rviewer free to raise or discuss any issue within topicIssues(or aspects of)discussed varied across interviewsInterviews digitally recorded and transcribedEmpirical ethics(Borry et al.,2007;van der Scheer and Widdershoven,2004)Interview Sampling StrategyPurposive(not random)Homogeneous group scienti

5、sts with working focus on molecular biology(gene technologies)Maximal variation(n=10)variety of specialist areas,both genders,age,range of attitudes to gene technologiesSnowball(n=12)Participant-demographics22 NZ scientists working in CRIs or universities 12 males,10 femalesAge range:26-60,mean=44,S

6、D=8.8yrField of study:mean=15.3yr,SD=8.6yrDisciplines(self-described):plant molecular biology,animal molecular biology,evolutionary molecular biology,soil science,entomology,ecology,economics,animal reproduction,microbiology,animal physiologyCurrent employer:mean=10.3yr,SD=9.1yrEducation:PhD=21,MSc=

7、1Researcher PositionalityAgR employee 8yrs as a psychologist and bioethicist(participant observer)Previously conducted research into public and scientists attitudes to biotechnologyPhilosophical orientation to researchPragmatism(e.g.,Morgan,2007;Onwuegbuzie&Leech,2005)Physical world mostly RealSocia

8、l world mostly ConstructedRealism and social constructionism both contain elements of truth for both the physical and social worlds but alone each is inadequateAction researchPoints of research subjectivity:Investigative topicData collectionData analysis and synthesisKnowledge co-created by intervie

9、wees and researcherAnalysisThematic analysis(Boyatzis,1998;Braun and Clarke,2006)interpretive processIdentify and select relevant text extractsDevelop codes to identify and describe patternsCollate codes to form higher level themesTA independent of ontological and epistemological perspective(Braun&C

10、larke,2006),consistent with pragmatic philosophical approachInductive(data driven)analysis,manifest and latent themesResults:Thematic Map Main Themes and Sub-themesScientific Social ResponsibilityDoing GoodEngagementKnowledgeTechnologyForesighting Informing societyBecoming informedDemocratisationCom

11、plianceLaws®sScientific normsBusiness normsSocietal normsPersonal ValuesThematic map:Doing GoodDoing Good Through Science(right vs wrong,benefit vs harm)KnowledgeTechnologyForesightingMoral status-Intrinsic value-Value free-PurposeDangerous or forbidden Moral status-Intrinsic value-PurposeDual us

12、e-ForbiddenA scientists social responsibilityCase-by-casePrecautionaryInforming societyDoing Good 1:A Moral ImperativeThe majority of participants believed:“Science has a responsibility to do public good”(#13)“Science should be done for the good of the greater world population”(#2)“Scientists have a

13、 responsibility to do public good.A lot of research is funded by the taxpayer”(#15)“I have a desire to do some sort of good for the community”(#8)“Why would you not want to do public good?”#17)“Scientists tend to be very ethical they are there because they are interested in humanity,in solving thing

14、s and problems to make things better”(#6)Doing Good 2:Distributive JusticeHowever,issues were raised about the distributive justice of S&T benefits(&harms):“Increasing technological power is increasing the gap between rich and poor,between Western and Third worlds,creating future problems unlikely t

15、o be resolved by peaceful social upheaval”(#2)“Lack of adequate distribution of wealth is one of the biggest social problems facing us in the 21st Century”(#4)“The benefits of research and technology need to be more evenly distributed throughout society”(#7)Doing Good 3:No Moral ImperativeIn contras

16、t,some considered that:“There is no ethical imperative to do good”(#9)“It is not the scientists primary activity to convert knowledge into public good,it is still to seek knowledge”(#21)“Scientists do not have any more of a responsibility than any other sector,bankers,shopkeepers,to do good.Society

17、cant demand more responsibility of scientists than they do of anybody else.”(#11)However,on reflection she raised a contrary argument of science as a vocation with an obligation to be especially morally responsible“Although ministers and police are supposed to be particularly ethical.Expectations of

18、 scientists are more like ministers and police than car salesman”(#11)Doing Good 4:Not Doing Harm Most considered it an ethical imperative that:“Scientists should not cause harm”(#9)“First,do no harm,not to do damage,not to make monsters”(#4)Harms to be avoided:“Need to be careful not to damage the

19、environment or biodiversity”(#15)“Not to have any negative impact on people”(#4)“Important to limit animal suffering for the sake of research”(#12)Safe products and practices“Safety of the products of science is an important ethical issue”(#3)“To do things appropriately and safelywe have an ethical

20、and social responsibility”(#14)Doing Good 5:Benefit and Harm But,knowledge and technology may have dual uses and effects with both benefits and harms and beneficiaries and victims“Almost any technology or field of science can have potential lethal applications if used as weapons”(#13)“Is this knowle

21、dge worth the harm that it may cause e.g.,animal suffering”(#12)Some technologies that produce benefits for society in one area have negative consequences for society in others e.g.,the car provides transport freedom at the expense of pollution,fossil fuel depletion,and road injuries and deathsDoing

22、 Good 6:Utilitarian ApproachTherefore,while non-harm was considered a moral ideal to be strived for,weighing benefits against harms was frequently seen as a more realistic approach“I take a utilitarian approach how do the possible benefits of the research weigh up against the possible harms”(#6)“Sci

23、entists have an obligation to help evaluate and understand both the potential benefits and potential risks associated with their fundamental research and with technological development”(#7)The later quote links a utilitarian approach to Doing Good through science with the theme of Engagement with th

24、e public and the sub-theme of ForesightingDoing Good 7:Scientists Responsibility for the Use of TechnologiesA few participants claimed that science and scientists had a responsibility for the use of S&T by society“Should we have responsibility for the use of S&T,and I guess the answer is yes do scie

25、ntists take responsibility?Probably not”(#8)“Scientists have a responsibility for the use to which their technological discoveries are put.If everybody blindly goes along not thinking about what they are actually doing and what it can be used for,then we have a problem.Researchers should definitely

26、be thinking about the future”(#13)The latter quote links scientists responsibility for technology use with their responsibility of ForesightingDoing Good 8:Limits of Responsibility for technology useSome participants,claiming use of S&T was unpredictable,questioned scientists responsibility for harm

27、 caused by use of their discoveries“If as a researcher you are an optimist and always trying to do public good then you dont tend to think what could be the negative things that could happen.It is very difficult to think of all those things,nobodys got a Gods eye view(#13)“It is often unclear how ne

28、w knowledge can be applied and what technologies might be developed.Scientists cannot be held responsible for unforeseen uses of the knowledge they develop”(#7)“It is up to society to decide which uses are ethical and which ones unethical and to regulate in accordance with societys norms”(#7)Themati

29、c Map:ComplianceComplianceLaws and RegsScientific normsSocietal normsPersonal valuesCompulsoryPositivesNegativesIntegrityObjectivityPublishingPeer reviewCompetenceBasic/applied balanceEthicsRelativismRight to ChallengeConscienceChoiceDifferent valuesEmotion/proximityBarriersBusiness normsThematic Ma

30、p:EngagementEngagementInforming publicBecoming informedDemocratisationSmall,B.,&Mallon,M.(2007).Science,society,ethics and trust:Scientists attitudes to commercialisation and democratisation of science.International Studies of Management and Organisation(Special Issue:Organizing Science),37(1):103-1

31、24.The Need for EngagementParticipants identified a social responsibility for scientist to Engage with the Public“Being socially responsible in research means communicating with the public”(#4)“Scientists need to listen to the public and engage in discussion with them over their work”(#2)“The public

32、 should have a role in setting the scientific research agenda and the weight that is put on particular parts of the agenda”(#8)“Scientists have a social obligation to make their work known to the public”(#11)“It is important to take the time to have this communication.Its very valuable to know that

33、you are going in the right direction.I think this communication between science and society is very important”(#21)The Need for EngagementDeficit theory“We need to make sure the public are more educated about science so they understand the debate the public just dont understand enough science to app

34、reciate the issues”(#16)“I think the biggest problem that weve got is to try and educate the public to a level that they can be confident with what we are doing”(#19)ButIn saying that,Im not even confident that my colleagues are doing the right thing.I actually dont blame the public for being scepti

35、cal,I really dont”(#19)“Some scientists have this thing I find incredibly patronising and rude,where they stand up and say the public just needs to be better educated.And every time I hear that,I just cringe,because it is so arrogant”(#10)“It is arrogant scientists who claim that the public is ignor

36、ant,that they are incapable of understanding science”(#11)Ideal Qualities of EngagementTransparency,honesty/integrity,accuracy of information,sufficiency of information,foresighting implications“Transparency is the main ethical responsibility.It is extremely important to be open rather than secretiv

37、e.Transparency gives the public the opportunity to see what scientists are doing,it puts research up for public scrutiny.In this way a scientists ethical responsibilities will be moderated by the community”(#13)“.being honest and open with the public”(#3)“to report scientific findings with honesty a

38、nd integrity”(#4)“to ensure that the science that you do,that the results,finding are actually reported as they are recorded in a way that enables people to interpret them so that you provide sufficient data for people to draw their own conclusions”(#1)“A scientist should be honest and say we have h

39、ad this finding,now it could be used for this,it could be used for that,this is unethical”(#11)Engagement:Helpful or Divisive?Helpful“where the debate has been taken to the public.There was a lot of rubbish said on both sides,but in the end people came back to a more middle ground.So scientists you

40、once heard saying there are no problems are now saying:well there are these issues.On both sides a lot of people arent saying the extreme stuff anymore they are arguing about real issues”(#11)Divisive“public debate,thats a them and us thing.That is,the debates have been disastrous in terms of polari

41、sing,because youre asked to come along to debate and it was quite definitely set up as them and us”(#20)Engagement needs to be fair“.it is right that scientific research should be open to public scrutiny,but it has to be a fair process”(#6)Types of EngagementEngagement may be:informal,unstructured,f

42、ormal,structured,culturally(in)appropriateMethods of Engagement included:conversation with non-science peers,public meetings,debates,dialogues,hui,ethical committees,Royal Commissions,professional groups,advocacy groups,caf scientifique“It is very important to have a method,and this is something tha

43、t is not well developed I dont think we have a good way for interacting between science and society”(#21)Engagement and the Media“Public interest in science is created by the media”(#15)“People are learning to use the press more to tell the public about what they are doing”(#22)“I think they could b

44、e more of our friends than they are”(#19)“The media dont tend to pick up on the good stories just the negative ones”(#10)“They sensationalise the issues rather than presenting fair and balanced points of view”(#15)“I know I have been misreported,its quite likely that other people are as well”(#19)Ba

45、rriers to EngagementCommercialisation of science“There are institutional barriers,so like in Company X,you cant actually go out and talk to the press unless you get official approval”(#3)Peer pressure“Our science general manager stood up and said we are going to be doing a lot of media releases on g

46、enetic engineering so please make sure that you sand up for what we are saying and that you tell everyone genetic engineering is good I think it would be very hard for a scientists to come out and say Im unsure in public.To do that you would feel like you are going against the science community”(#10

47、)Career progress“If I spent all the rest of my career making sure that people heard about my research findings and didnt pursue new knowledge,then I wouldnt get anywhere career wise”(#8)Barriers to EngagementLack of resources for engagement“A barrier we have to being socially responsible,is the lack

48、 of valuing that time and allocating it to the process of engagement”(#21)Distain for science popularisers“Why do scientists criticise people for writing for the public?Its the demeaning thing,it demeans science”(#14)Scientific jargon“Scientific jargon can be a barrier to social responsibility it ca

49、n be a screen for scientists to hide behind a barrier to honest communication”(#11)Not all scientists are suitable for engaging with the public“It come down to personality,some people are good at it,some people are crap at it”(#17)Engagement:Informing the Public“The public have a right to be informe

50、d about what science is doing”(#8)“Scientists need to create a balance to the misinformation spread by groups such as the Greens,MADGE and GE Free NZ”(#15)Complex science makes it difficult“Its a difficult process because the science thats being done is very technical and society is very large and m