Uploaded by Shayan Fatima


While coming across this question and doing my extensive browsing and research. I came to
realize that we cannot base the answer on one factor and that there are different opinions
and reasoning depending on the situation and thus I concluded that some things are multi
factorial I.e. it does not depend on a single factor. On the contrary it depends or involves
different number of factors. Now let’s dive deep into the topics and see what lies ahead of
Although this discussion is a bit difficult to grasp but let’s talk about the dissimilarities in
ethics and science first. The one and only difference between ethics and other sciences is
that ethics is not a science, science is by nature universal in being what is right for one is
right for all who follow it and what is wrong for one is wrong for all. In ethics what might be
considered right for one might be wrong for the other, simplest example is meat eating.
The term value and its relationship with ethics in action or activity in the world should be
considered to understand this aspect. Value addition to an action or activity goes hand in
hand with human intellect, if the value added to an existing act comes out right, then it
becomes a science , and if not then it is not yet a science , the part in action exists, but as it
is not adding up, it is to be worked at, looked into, as why it is not adding up to the action or
activity in being.
Science works on this formula, but ethics which are taken up by human being as an add on
value to life ,somehow do not add up, in this world present since time immemorial ,they are
though meant to add value to human life, yet they fail to do so, were it not for laws of the
land, human life would have suffered severely.
But surprisingly the term ethics can be sensed in one’s being, there value in life exists ,but
the way one is asked to live them in life does not hold waters in life, the reason for this is
that it is an aesthetic aspect of nature, it permeates being, ,its add on value is to be felt in
the actions and activities in being, one has to live them or it in life, for only then it can be
conceived, the only possibility of it is there ,and it is conveyed only by religion
On the other hand, we have some similarities too like some people say science and the
ethics of science are two sides of the same coin, dealing with the same empirical data and
actions of the same scientists.
As well as thinking of their actions in terms of future experimental design, scientists must
explain the significance of their actions in the wider scientific and human contexts. Scientists
must take the lead in ensuring that the progress of science is both ethical and as free from
political intervention as possible, if for no other reason than that only they can do so.
Science is an activity of the human intellect and as such has ethical implications that should
be reviewed and considered. Although science and ethics have conventionally been
considered different, it is herewith proposed that they are essentially similar. The proposal
set henceforth is to create a new ethics rooted in science: scientific ethics. Science has firm
axiological foundations and searches for truth (as a value, axiology) and knowledge
(epistemology). Hence, science cannot be value neutral. Looking at standard scientific
principles, it is possible to construct a scientific ethic (that is, an ethical framework based on
scientific methods and rules), which can be applied to all sciences. These intellectual
standards include the search for truth (honesty and its derivatives), human dignity (and by
reflection the dignity of all animals) and respect for life. Through these it is thence
achievable to draft a foundation of a ethics based purely on science and applicable beyond
the confines of science. A few applications of these will be presented. Scientific ethics can
have vast applications in other fields even in non-scientific ones.
The word “profession” means different things to different people. But at its core, it’s meant
to be an indicator of trust and expertise.
Traditionally, a “professional” was someone who derived their income from their expertise
or specific talents, as opposed to a hobbyist or amateur. This still carries through to fields
today, such as sport.
But given today’s fast-changing environment of knowledge and expertise, it’s now generally
understood that simply deriving an income from a task might make you an “expert” or
“good at your job” – but if you’re a “professional”, this has a broader meaning.
There’s a long history of attempts to clarify this meaning, and to define the functions of
professions. These attempts typically centralise around some sort of moral or ethical
foundation within the practice of a specific and usually established expertise.
A profession is a disciplined group of individuals who adhere to ethical standards. This
group positions itself as possessing special knowledge and skills in a widely recognised body
of learning derived from research, education and training at a high level, and is recognised
by the public as such. A profession is also prepared to apply this knowledge and exercise
these skills in the interest of others1.
Ethics, as a field of study, is sort of like a tree with 10,000 branches—branches that all
disagree with each other. With such variances, the, how do we begin to understand ethics?
One way to really think about ethics is through its historical meaning, which has to do with a
person’s ethos. This is the idea that ethics relates to character, and it is sort of a high
standard approach to what it means to act in a particularly cogent and courageous way, as
well as to demonstrate personal integrity. And then there is a more important conceptual
distinction a person could make, particularly between ethics and morals. This is needed
because when defining ethics, many will use the word “morals” interchangeably, which
confuses the issue.
There is, however, some disagreement among scholars as to the difference between morals
and ethics. One school of thought asserts that morality is inherently founded on spiritual
principles–one’s responsibility to a supernatural being or goal. Ethics, on the other hand,
relies on materialist and social consequences, not spiritual ones, in order to determine what
is ethical or not. Other schools of thought argue that this line between morals and ethics is
arbitrary. Instead, they believe ethics is simply a formal branch of philosophy that concerns
itself with the study of morals and their justification; this group would assert that ethics is
the philosophy of morals.
Within the broad field of applied ethics, professional ethics assesses the moral dimension of
human activity in the classic occupations of law, medicine, ministry and by extension higher
education, engineering, journalism, management and other occupations that aspire to
professional status. Professional ethics is concerned with the standards and moral conduct
that govern the profession and its members. More specifically, professional ethics examines
issues, problems, and the social responsibility of the profession itself and individual
practitioners in the light of philosophical and, in some contexts, religious principles among
which are duty and obligation.