Transcript University of Utah Conflict of Interest Policy

Social Responsibility in Science,
or Who is Responsible?
Phil 7570, Fall 2006
Bryan Benham
1
Thanks to the Faculty!
•
•
•
•
•
Leslie Francis (Phil & Law)
Kathi Mooney (Nursing)
Caren Frost (Soc Work)
Kim Korinek (Sociology)
Rachel Hayes-Harb
(Linguistics)
• Frank Whitby (Biochem)
• Tom Richmond (Chemistry)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
David Grunwald (Genetics)
Dana Carroll (Biochem)
Barbara Graves (Onc Sci)
Michael Kay (Biochem)
Janet Lindsley (Biochem)
Jim Metherall (Genetics)
Carlie Murtaugh (Genetics)
Marty Rechsteiner (Biochem)
Alice Schmid (Genetics)
Katie Ullman (Onc Sci)
Imagination is more important than
knowledge. For knowledge is limited,
whereas imagination embraces the entire
world, stimulating progress, giving birth to
evolution.
– Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
Why is imagination important?
Scientific Imagination
and
Moral Imagination
Scientific Imagination
Concerned with advancing knowledge & technology
Scientific Imagination
Concerned with advancing knowledge & technology
Moral Imagination
Concerned with understanding the implications of
knowledge and technology
Scientific Imagination
Concerned with advancing knowledge & technology
Moral Imagination
Concerned with understanding the implications of knowledge
and technology
Both are an integral part of research,
of being a scientist
Most of what we did in this course was
aimed at demonstrating that both
scientific and moral imagination 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
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.
Balancing Three
Questions
1. What rules or principles apply?
C
P
2. What are the consequences?
I
3. Whose interests are involved?
Identifying and balancing the three types
of questions requires a degree of moral
imagination
Next: I want to try to extend this to
broader social responsibilities
Do research scientists have
special responsibilities to
society?
YES
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…”
Expanding Circle of
Concerns for RCR
Research Practice
Professional Relations
Research Subjects &
Other Commitments
Social Responsibilities
Expanding Circle of
Concerns for RCR
Research Practice
Professional Relations
Research Subjects &
Other Commitments
Social Responsibilities
Expanding Circle of
Concerns for RCR
Research Practice
Professional Relations
Research Subjects &
Other Commitments
Social Responsibilities
Expanding Circle of
Concerns for RCR
Research Practice
Professional Relations
Research Subjects &
Other Commitments
Social Responsibilities
Expanding Circle of
Concerns for RCR
Research Practice
Professional Relations
Research Subjects &
Other Commitments
Social Responsibilities?
Do scientists have special
responsibilities to society?
YES
In part because we already recognize
responsibilities in research practice, toward
human/animal subjects, public source of
funding, etc.
What about other areas?
Responsibility to/for…
• Future implications or applications of
discovery?
• Shaping and deciding social and public
policy?
• National and/or global interests?
– defense, economy, human welfare, etc.
Future implications or
applications of discovery?
• Consider
– E = mc2 and Manhattan project….no, but
– rDNA and…?
• Asilomar conference, 1975
• GM foods, animals, and humans?
– HGP
• DOE and NIH devoted 3%-5% of annual
budget to ethical, social, and legal issues ELSI
Shaping and deciding
social and public policy?
• Consider
–
–
–
–
Climate science (global warming)
Stem cells and cloning
Health policy
Neurosciences and behavioral genetics in legal
and social practices
• Science and Politics?
National and/or global
interests?
• Human Welfare?
– AIDS, malaria, etc.
– Food, energy, etc.
• Economic?
– Biotech industry
– Commercial innovation via discovery
• Defense?
– WW II efforts (Manhattan project) vs. post-WWII
efforts (e.g., Hydrogen bomb); cold-war?
– War on Terror and Biodefense?
Hans Bethe
Nobel Prize Physics 1967
• WWII worked on radar & atomic bomb
• But distinguished between
– War-time research in the face of aggressor
– Weapons research without imminent war
• Current “war on terrorism”? DoD, DoE, & DARPA
– Biodefense?
– Brain Research?
• Moreno, J. D. (2006). The role of brain research in national
defense. The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 10.
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.”
Although there is room for
disagreement…
In each case, the weight of these
considerations favor the idea that
scientists do indeed have special
responsibilities to society
Whence the special
responsibility to society?
• Scientific knowledge has a lasting impact on society.
• The people who produce knowledge should be responsible for
its consequences and uses.
• Scientific knowledge is meant to benefit society.
• Much research is relevant to formulating public policy.
• Scientific knowledge should be freely/openly available to
members of society (not for private/elite use only).
• Scientific research supported by public resources.
• Scientists have special knowledge and expertise not available to
everyone
• Science is a profession, with codes of ethics that often include
social obligations.
• Scientists are members of society (citizen-scientists).
But, most importantly…
because scientific research is
embedded in a larger social and ethical
context; and this is an essential
component of scientific research.
Science is not removed from society
Two worries about a
special responsibility
• Values in science
• Individual vs. group responsibilities*
Facts vs. values?
• Science is not (strictly speaking) value-free or
value-neutral
– Although it aims are objective, repeatable,
empirically based knowledge
• Science is a human enterprise…so it is valueinfused
– Consider how one pursues or promotes own
research, how it is communicated, how decisions
about funding and peer review are made, etc.
– Consider history (In the Name of Science)
– Consider “controversial science”
History
(From Katrin Weigmann, “In the Name of Science”)
Writing on the role of biologists in Nazi social
policy:
“Scientific theories and arguments were used to support the
inferiority of other races”
“It was scientific and medical methods, scientific and medical
speech that were used in carrying out these crimes in the name
of science.”
“Scientists were too devoted to their peculiar field of research to
ever reflect the consequences of their deeds.”
Controversial Science
• Scientific research that is, or is perceived to
be, at odds with social values or goals;
suggests scientific research carries with it
value:
– Topics that breach sensitive issues
• Cloning/Stem-cell, GM agriculture, Sex Research, etc.
– Topics that are ideologically loaded
• IQ Research, AIDS and sexuality research, Global
Warming, Evolution in Schools, etc.
– Topics that are “beyond the pale of society”
• Torture Techniques, Head-Transplant Surgery, etc.
The Frankenstein Effect2
Angry Mob Effect
• Public Overreaction
– Offense to Moral
Sensibilities
– Demonizing Science
• Fear
– Threat to well-being
– Challenge to deeply
held beliefs
• Lack of
Understanding?
Mad Scientist Effect
• Rejects Social Responsibility
– Value-Free Inquiry?
– Consequences not
considered
– Paternalism: science knows
best
• Isolated from Society
– Poorly Educates Public
– (PR Failure?)
– Insensitive to Social Values
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.”
Responsibility and
Imagination
• Understanding values
• Understanding implications of research
• Understanding the direction of science
– Individually and collectively
– Where it should or shouldn’t go
– How it gets there
Responsibility and
Imagination
• Understand that research is done within a larger
social and ethical context
• Realize a sense of personal responsibility for one's
own research and one's place in society as a
researcher
• Can’t avoid the question of social responsibility…it is
intrinsic to science
George Brown, Jr.
Congressional champion of science at AAAS
Colloquium on Science and Technology, 1992.
“…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.”
Imagine…
If not you… who?
If we don’t play God, who will?
– James Watson
With great power,
comes great responsibility.
– Uncle Ben to Peter Parker
in Spider-Man
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.