Basing Science Ethics on Respect for Human Dignity

被引:0
作者
Mehmet Aközer
Emel Aközer
机构
[1] Middle East Technical University,
来源
Science and Engineering Ethics | 2016年 / 22卷
关键词
Ethics of science; Scientific ethos; Human dignity; Respect for truth; Genetic determinism;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A “no ethics” principle has long been prevalent in science and has demotivated deliberation on scientific ethics. This paper argues the following: (1) An understanding of a scientific “ethos” based on actual “value preferences” and “value repugnances” prevalent in the scientific community permits and demands critical accounts of the “no ethics” principle in science. (2) The roots of this principle may be traced to a repugnance of human dignity, which was instilled at a historical breaking point in the interrelation between science and ethics. This breaking point involved granting science the exclusive mandate to pass judgment on the life worth living. (3) By contrast, respect for human dignity, in its Kantian definition as “the absolute inner worth of being human,” should be adopted as the basis to ground science ethics. (4) The pathway from this foundation to the articulation of an ethical duty specific to scientific practice, i.e., respect for objective truth, is charted by Karl Popper’s discussion of the ethical principles that form the basis of science. This also permits an integrated account of the “external” and “internal” ethical problems in science. (5) Principles of the respect for human dignity and the respect for objective truth are also safeguards of epistemic integrity. Plain defiance of human dignity by genetic determinism has compromised integrity of claims to knowledge in behavioral genetics and other behavioral sciences. Disregard of the ethical principles that form the basis of science threatens epistemic integrity.
引用
收藏
页码:1627 / 1647
页数:20
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] Beauchamp TL(2002)Changes of climate in the development of practical ethics Science and Engineering Ethics 8 131-138
  • [2] Chaufan C(2013)The ‘missing heritability’ of common disorders: Should health researchers care? International Journal of Health Services 43 281-303
  • [3] Joseph J(2002)International science and fair-play practices Science and Engineering Ethics 8 5-11
  • [4] Drenth PJD(2004)La génétique est-elle encore une discipline? Erudit 20 248-253
  • [5] Gayon J(2007)The language game of responsible agency and the problem of free will: How can epistemic dualism be reconciled with ontological monism? Philosophical Explorations 10 13-50
  • [6] Habermas J(2010)The concept of human dignity and the realistic utopia of human rights Metaphilosophy 41 464-480
  • [7] Habermas J(2000)Ethics and the responsibility of science Science and Engineering Ethics 6 131-142
  • [8] Johnson DG(1996)Forbidden knowledge and science as professional activity Monist 79 197-217
  • [9] Kalleberg R(2007)A reconstruction of the ethos of science Journal of Classical Sociology 7 137-160
  • [10] Kevles DJ(2009)Eugenics, the genome, and human rights Medicine Studies 1 85-93