A few questions for discussion from chpt 2, pp. 37-8. Pick a few that most interest you.
1. Do you think most scientists and science students are ethical?
3. What situations in science present the most difficult ethical problems and dilemmas?
4. Do you think researchers should adhere to the same ethical standards that apply to other professions, such as medicine or law? Why or why not?
5. Do you think researchers have ethical duties and responsibilities 'over and above' the ethical obligations of ordinary people?
7. Is reasoning the best method for making an ethical decision? Why or why not?
Is reasoning the best method for making an ethical decision? I would like to think yes, that making an ethical choice is refined or made more legitimate through rational thought process.
ReplyDeleteBut, I can think of some situations where internal reasoning is not enough. That is, in some situations it takes dialogue and other individuals to come to making ethical decisions. And that isn't to say that a person may not be able to reason adequately enough alone (which may be the case, but it's not the point I want to hit), but rather, the reasoning process may not encounter the seemingly irrational principles from which others participate.
Referring back to the blood transfusion problem - we, as rational people, may conclude that since the two options are death or life, that giving the transfusion is reasonably the best decision. But, failing to encounter the religious principle of the Jehovah's Witness may result in a greater harm - the person may live, but his/her priority may be in his spiritual life, not his physical. And you, the rational actor here, are actually condemning this person to spiritual Hell.
It's something to consider, right?
3. I think the situations in science that present the most difficult ethical dilemmas are undoubtedly those that pertain to research subjects. Reading "The Immortal Life" has made me realize this even more than I had before. When dealing with human subjects, or studies that will affect the well-being of many individuals (medical research), there is an incredibly delicate balance between serving the greater good and protecting individual rights. There have been a frightening amount of injustices done to research subjects throughout science's history--from the Tuskegee Syphilis studies, to the horrors of the Nuremberg studies, to the HeLa cell injections performed by Chester Southam. Research such as this violates almost all pertinent theories and principles, but there are innumerable other examples that are perhaps less obvious but still just as ethically involved.
ReplyDelete4. I don't think that researchers should adhere to EXACTLY the same ethical standards that apply to other professions; researchers, for example, must have ethical principles in place that protect their subjects and facilitate a sharing of information between all involved in the field. These principles might not be relevant for the bulk of other professions. I do feel, however, that certain ethical principles apply to all professionals and to all human beings in general. Not to sound cliche, but honesty, for example, is always the best policy. All human beings should also respect the autonomy of others, and all should act in a just fashion.
5. I think that yes, researchers do have ethical duties over and above the ethical obligations of ordinary people because they are facilitating and directing actions among people that could have major effects on those people's lives. Any occupation that deals largely with people should, in my opinion, have a higher degree of ethical duties and responsibilities. As a researcher, what you do can have a very significant impact on your subjects' lives. Those subjects are trusting that the researcher is giving them the type of drug the researcher said he would. The subjects are trusting that the researcher will use the data and information the way that he said it would be used. And the subjects are trusting that the researcher will keep all data anonymous as he said he would. These are all responsibilities and duties the researcher should keep, and in doing so, answer to a higher ethical standard than many other "ordinary" people must answer to in their daily lives.
ReplyDeleteKaylan, would that mean then that ordinary people can be excused when failing to make "good choices" in such situations?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAfter our discussion of data today, I think I'd like to change my answer to #3. While ethical dilemmas in the realm of human (and animal) research subjects may perhaps be the most glaring, I feel that those pertaining to data are perhaps the most difficult. Only a handful of researchers deal with human subjects on a regular basis, but ALL researchers have to analyze and manipulate their data. This is where real ethical problems can arise; researchers constantly have to make sure that they aren't tweaking their data or presenting only that which supports their hypothesis.
ReplyDelete#5: Those with a greater impact have a greater responsibility to uphold an ethical standard. Because researchers have the potential to hurt more people, their responsibility to ethics is greater. I'm not saying that Average Joe doesn't have an ethical duty, but he probably cannot effect the future of research, medicine, etc...
ReplyDelete#7: Reason and logic tends to be the black and white view of the world (tends to be, not IS). Ethics is a lovely shade of gray. To bring Aristotle's Virtue Ethics into the picture, I think that reason needs a backround foundation of morality and/or virtue to influence the choices a researcher makes. Honesty is not going to be seen as the logical choice if the person does not believe honesty to be a very important concept.
4. Do you think researchers should adhere to the same ethical standards that apply to other professions, such as medicine or law? Why or why not?
ReplyDelete5. Do you think researchers have ethical duties and responsibilities 'over and above' the ethical obligations of ordinary people?
Yes and yes! Researchers should definitely adhere to the same ethical standards that apply to those practicing medicine or law and should even have higher ethical responsibilities. I agree with Kaylan that any one who plays an important, highly regarded role in society should be held to higher standards than "ordinary people" and should serve as an example for others. Researchers are finding important information that can save lives and make great strides in development for our nation and world. These men and women, should, therefore, take this role seriously and perform with the best interests of others in mind out of the virtue of love. In order to be respected, it is essential that researchers practice with integrity, not manipulating or harming anyone or anything throughout research, and striving to find solutions that will be useful in society. They are being looked to as those who are seeking to save the world, so they must see themselves in this same light and act accordingly, as ethical, diligent heroes.