Social Responsibility in Science
Phil 7570, Fall 2007
Panel Discussion
1
Thanks to the Faculty!
•
•
•
•
•
Kathi Mooney (Nursing)
Kim Korinek (Sociology)
Rachel Hayes-Harb (Linguistics)
Frank Whitby (Biochem)
Tom Richmond (Chemistry)
Guest Presenters
• Chi-Bin Chien (Mbiol)
• Patrick Kiser (Bio-Eng)
• Hunter Jackson (Venture)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
David Grunwald (Genetics)
Dana Carroll (Biochem)
Matt Williams (Pathol)
Michael Kay (Biochem)
Jim Metherall (Genetics)
Marty Rechsteiner (Biochem)
Alice Schmid (Genetics)
Jody Rosenblatt (Onc Sci)
Course Objectives
Most of what we did in this course was
aimed at demonstrating that both
scientific and ethical sensitivity are
important, and unavoidable features of
science
Course Objectives
1.
Increase ethical sensitivity to issues regarding RCR
2.
Aid in developing moral reasoning skills; via case
studies
3.
Acquaint with relevant policies, procedures, and
professional standards of ethical research
Central Dogma
The focus of the course is not merely the legal or
explicit regulations, but identifying and employing
the underlying ethical principles and values that
guide responsible research, so that one can
(ideally) navigate the rocky shoals and murky waters
of daily research practice.
Topics & Lessons?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Misconduct
Data Management
Authorship
Mentoring
Human Participants
Animal Subjects
Commerce & Conflicts
Special Topics
Social Responsibility
Honesty & Accuracy
Preserving Research Record
Credit & Accountability
Apprentice to Expert
Autonomy, Beneficience, Justice
Humane research
Disclose Interests
International context important
?????
Do scientists have special
responsibilities to society?
Ruth Ellen Bulger
Professor of Anatomy, Physiology, and Genetics at the Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
Just how far does the commitment of scientists to [society]
extend? There is agreement among scientists on a commitment
to doing research in an honest, trustworthy, competent, and
ethical manner. There is a general commitment to ethical
conduct in research with human volunteers and in treating
animal subjects in a humane and respectful way. There is a
growing awareness of the importance of educating and working
with the public on scientific and ethical issues …. However,
[there is] less agreement … among scientists on how best to
deal with pressing social issues brought about by scientific
developments…”
Question #1
• As a scientist/researcher, what do you
consider to be your social responsibility?
• Does it go beyond simply doing good
science?
• Are your social responsibility limited to your
local or national interests, or does it/should it
include more international concerns?
Question #2
Advancements in science and technology
often outstrip the ability of current legal or
social institutions to understand or regulate
them leading some people to claim that
science needs to be more social responsible
(ie, ethical) or more regulated.
Please comment on the following cartoon…
Question #3
It is uncontroversial that research funded by
public money should address social ills, such
as disease or environmental issues. But what
if society deems certain forms of research to
be unethical (if not illegal) or beyond the pale,
and you feel contrary. (eg, hESC research or
cloning)
• How responsive should science/research be
to social concerns?
Arthur Caplan
Director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania
“But the greatest threat to the control and
dissemination of research is this marriage
with the military and anti-terrorist activities.
The scientific community hasn’t given five
minutes of thought to how to preserve their
rights to publish and pick the topics they
want. And there’s no hesitancy on the part of
DARPA to say “You can’t publish” or “You
can’t do this, this is ours. We own it.”
Question #4
• Given the funding priorities since 9/11, such
as “Project Bioshield” which funds research
on detecting and protecting against potential
bioterrorist threats, and regardless of your
views on the War on Terror…
• How should scientists respond to national
defense initiatives that affect research in your
area?
Mousepox case
A few years ago, researchers in Australia
studying mouse-pox inadvertently created an
extremely virulent strain of mouse-pox. They
published their research in a respectable
journal, but soon came under criticism for
publishing information that might be used by
terrorist or other unsavory types, to develop a
more virulent form of small-pox. The
researchers replied that it was better to have
the information available, so countersolutions could be developed.
Question #5
• Was it socially irresponsible for the
researchers to have published this
material?
• Should it be the job of journals to filter
some of this information before
publishing it?
Communication
There has been some discussion in the press
about the disconnect between scientists and
the public in scientific matters. Some argue
that the public should be better educated so
they can understand current scientific
developments that may affect them. But
others counter that scientists should do a
better job of educating the public themselves.
Question #6
• How important is it for
scientists/researchers to be able to
effectively communicate to the general
public about their research?
• Is it your role as a scientist/researcher
to "popularize" your research?
A recent case
• Nobel Winner Issues
Apology for Comments
About Blacks.
– New York Times, Oct. 19, 2007.
• Henry Kelly, president of the
Federation of American
Scientists said it was “tragic
that one of the icons of
modern science has
cast such dishonor on
the profession.”
Question #7
• What obligations do you have, as a scientist
communicating to the public, to fellow
scientists?
• For example, should you refrain from
controversial topics? Should you represent
only “mainstream” ideas in science? How
should you represent science?
Question #8
• If you were invited to advise as an expert in your field
of research on a government board regarding public
policy (assume that it is relevant to public policy),
what is your responsibility as a scientist?
• Is it your obligation to remove your own
political/social convictions (insofar as you can) from
your advice about research matters? Or should you
take this as an opportunity to inject your political
views into the process, while at the same time not
distorting the science?
Arthur Caplan
Director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania
“You can’t get very far [in scientific research]
without values appearing, even in some
strictly molecular activities. I would also say
that you scare the public if you continue to
assert that you don’t think about the ethical
aspects of what you are doing. The fear of the
‘mad’ scientist isn’t that he or she is mad, it’s
that he or she is indifferent to the ethics of
what they are doing.”
Question #9
• What responsibility do scientists have to
publicly evaluate the ethical implications
of their’s and others research?
• What is your responsibility as a
scientist-citizen to actively engage in
current issues relevant to your
expertise?
Closing Thoughts
“…we need a new and better vision… Neither
technology nor economics can answer questions of
values. Is our path into the future to be defined by the
literally mindless process of technological evolution
and economic expansion or by a conscious adoption
of guiding moral precepts? Progress is meaningless if
we don’t know where we’re going. Unless we try to
visualize what is beyond the horizon, we will always
occupy the same shore.”
George Brown, Jr.
Congressional champion of science at AAAS Colloquium on
Science and Technology, 1992.
Sources
•
•
•
•
Bulger, Ruth Ellen. (2002). The scientist in society. In the Ethical
Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences, 2nd ed. Cambridge
University Press, 313-319.
Weigmann, Katrin. (2001). In the name of science. EMBO reports 2,
871-875.
Breithaupt, Holger, & Hadley, Caroline. (2005). Interview with Arthur
Caplan, building stairs into slippery slopes. EMBO reports 6, 8-12.
Bethe, H. (1983). The ethical responsibilities of scientists: weapons
development rather than military research poses the most difficult
questions. The Center Magazine, 16(5); 2-5.