Updated date:

Ethical Failures of the Scientific Method.

A lifelong study of ethics, law and religious history has shown me that science lacks wisdom. Ethics also needs to b applied scientifically.

Ethical Issues

3rd Century Papyrus: Hippocratic Oath Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license

3rd Century Papyrus: Hippocratic Oath Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license

the-fallibility-of-science
What's missing? No requirement as to effects on the environment or any ethical values such as the ability to rectify dangerous side effects.

What's missing? No requirement as to effects on the environment or any ethical values such as the ability to rectify dangerous side effects.

The stereotype of the mad scientist has some basis in fact. Knowledge without ethics is in fact madness.

The stereotype of the mad scientist has some basis in fact. Knowledge without ethics is in fact madness.

Basic Ethics in Science

As the graph shows there are already numerous areas where science has been found lacking in ethics similar to other professions. Duty, Honesty, Plagiarism, Fraud, Misconduct etc. to name a few. Many of these are already covered by existing laws.

However this Hub deals with the more fundamental flaws which occur in the Scientific Method itself: (1) that of not stating the obvious possible repercussions that a discovery or process has on human beings, animals or the environment, and (2) not having an inbuilt principle of correcting such errors. Nuclear wastes for example have no antidote or principle of correction.

In order to correct this fundamental problem the highest personal standard of ethics needs to be demanded of scientists. It firstly needs to be codified into a style of "Hippocratic oath" as taken by doctors. From as early as the 5th Century BC ancient Greek doctors took the oath. It is now the 21st Century but there is still no "Hippocratic Oath" for scientists. Science is therefore 2,500 years behind in ethical evolution.

Secondly, new "science laws" need to be formulated and rigorously enforced. The lazy unethical attitude to so called "unintended consequences" has to be eliminated.

BIOETHICS leads the field in questions relating to ethics and science mainly because of the rich history of medical ethics and the inculcation of basic ideals such as the Hippocratic oath.

In ancient times all the sciences were often bundled into one profession. As modern times approached science began to become incredibly over specialized, but no accompanying ethical standards were applied to it.

In nineteenth century Europe arsenic tinted green wallpaper killed and sickened thousands of people. In the twentieth century thalidomide maimed and killed thousands. The common thread to such examples is a lack of ethics in the laboratory and a lack of laws to oversee these missing ethical standards.

INDUSTRIAL LAWS are now being put into place which are slowly counteracting the ethical vacuum in industry. Likewise BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL LAWS have slowly been inching forward in only the last few years.

However there are still NO SCIENTIFIC ETHICS OR LAWS imposed on scientists.

Now with at least some form of incipient ethics affecting business, industry and finance, scientists can no longer blame others or shift responsibility for their own unethical decisions.

At the very start of the scientific process, the actual scientific method must start and end with ethical considerations, restrictions and New Laws. The scientific method without these considerations is literally madness. For example, deliberately torturing animals in experiments is a form of sadism and a mental aberration that can't be condoned under the guise of "scientific research". It is an example of how wisdom is separated from science as wisdom is in fact always intimately linked to ethics and not just mere accumulated information.

The reader might say this is impossible or undesirable, however without any ethical restrictions at all in this field there is no chance of limiting the damage currently being caused.


Code of Ethics

The Recent Past: Industrial Science Without Ethics

Industrial Science http://markcharlton.our.dmu.ac.uk/2014/11/27/my-presentation-to-network-of-directors-of-faculty-operationscollege-secretaries/

Industrial Science http://markcharlton.our.dmu.ac.uk/2014/11/27/my-presentation-to-network-of-directors-of-faculty-operationscollege-secretaries/

Industrial Science

Industrial science is severely ethically lacking when compared to the medical sciences. Although it uses new scientific discoveries it has few guiding personal or industry ethics and grudgingly accepts any new attempts at ethical regulation. It's only goal was, and largely still is, to make money regardless of human suffering or damage to the environment.

Many scientists do not own their work but are "bought out" by the industries financing the research. Their sole aim is to invent new products and processes in order to increase profits. Ethical problems were conveniently shelved by scientists and totally ignored by big business.

A real scientist does not, and should not be allowed by law, to "pass the buck".

Discussions regarding ethical problems were once totally absent from both Industry and big business. Scientists are still allowed to be indifferent to the awful "unintended" consequences of their work. Industry is now reluctantly considering limited ethical problems in its greedy pursuit of money. These are often token efforts.

This corrupt attitude began developing five hundred years ago as science slipped out of the grasp of both the church and the law. A tradition developed excusing scientists from normal ethical restrictions as it became increasingly obvious there was money to be made. It is this unhappy marriage between science/business/ big money that is at the crux of the ethical problems facing science today. It has little or nothing to do with "freedom" except the freedom to profit unfettered from all ethical considerations. Hence scientists are still held immune from all ethical considerations with the exception of medicine. How much plastic or millions of tons other pollutants are involved in this science-business marriage is deemed irrelevant. Other vitally important issues which urgently need to be ethically analyzed are the social problems resulting from the disregard of any formally established ethical criteria.

Social and Environmental Probelms

A Mad Scientist is an Unethical Scientist

 Why is the stereotype of the mad scientist so prevalent in both fiction and reality?

Why is the stereotype of the mad scientist so prevalent in both fiction and reality?

The Department of Scientific Ethics

Although this may at first appear extreme, or like science fiction, this is only relative when contrasted to the long history of neglect in formal scientific ethics. It is partially a result of historically bad thought patterns that has led science to be left out of the ethical picture. The passion and eagerness for new discoveries, combined with greed, has lead to a severe neglect of scientific ethical study.

NEW AI TECHNOLOGY could be programmed to administer ethical laws in this complex future involving both the growing internet abuse of ethics and in the monitoring of online businesses.

The old stereotype of the "mad scientist" has some basis in fact if we ponder a scientist who considers they are above all ethical considerations. This is commonly referred to as megalomania or delusional paranoia.

The fact is science has undergone revolution after revolution without any serious ethical reflection at all about the social or environmental repercussions it can cause.

New laws need to be urgently fashioned to deal with the current explosion in technology in order to curtail and repair social and environmental damage. Such laws need to be open ended so that no unintended consequences of any scientific process can excuse industry from the same said laws. If problems occur along the chain of science and industry the same laws should bite into the various businesses to immediately stop further problems regardless of cost to industry.


SOCIAL PROBLEMS: if the internet has caused social problems the reasons for the causes of such issues needs to be addressed by new scientific laws so the problem can be solved. The goal is not to allow the social problem to continue like an open sewer. A small example is the new trend in social media of bullying others. An inability to immediately stop such a problem would therefore necessitate an inbuilt legal shut down of sites until the problem is fixed regardless of the cost to industry.

Real Solutions to Extreme Problems

Comments

Tony on October 20, 2021:

God has nothing to do with religion. Neither of the terms, "God", nor "Religion", have any universally accepted definition. Your articles and your opinions are meaningless.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on April 09, 2020:

Hi David

Yes I agree and law evolved out of religion. I deal with this issue in another hub.

David Thiessen from Philippines on May 17, 2019:

Laws are not the total answer. Only God can keep people ethical

Melanie C Lopez born Feb Fourteenth from Whittier, CA on March 09, 2017:

Order is best understood through algorthems. I notice there has been a lot of back lash as to science and the connection the truth. The yes God does exist and yes many people in the bible walked on earth and God new the end thousand of years before and inspired people to write the Books through the understanding that he has given them.

V Greenfield on September 12, 2016:

Very interesting hub! Honestly this is not something that many people including me would probably think of. I'm glad it was brought up though. It makes me think of cloning and while it would be amazing in the scientific sense, ethically these kinds of controversial experiments could end up being a disaster if not handled properly. I agree that science needs to start thinking in ethical terms when conducting experiments.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on January 17, 2016:

Venkat

The power of money as a kind of God has to be weakened. Anti pollution laws need to start at the begining of the process and continue right through industrial processes.

Venkatachari M from Hyderabad, India on January 17, 2016:

Very good topic. Your points are appropriate and need to be solved by our scientists, industrialists and governments. Ethical guidelines should be formulated to control many issues like pollution, erosion of natural resources, contamination of waters, tampering of nature's beauty, and many more issues.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on January 15, 2016:

Randa

as I pointed out it is in the area of medicine where we find a history of ethics.

Industrial tech is sadly lacking and pollution has increased.

It is where Big money meets science that the worst abuses are occuring.

Randa Awn Handler from USA on January 14, 2016:

You ask some tough questions. Ethics and freedoms are sometimes so intertwined. I happen to have many siblings in science and I do understand their views on research, testing and for the good of the masses views. But, it’s the roar of the activists that has improved much of that testing and made it follow more humane methods. I don’t agree with some of the comments that researchers are basically bought by corporations. I do know some seriously ethical scientists who live to find that elusive cure and nothing else!

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on January 02, 2016:

Mel/Lawrence

I'm still working on the Hub. There was almost nothing available on scientific ethics to go on!

Lawrence Hebb from Hamilton, New Zealand on January 02, 2016:

Mel

I couldn't agree more! You've only got to watch your animals around to see they're more than just a lump of organic matter to be used and abused as we see fit! (Sorry Oz, didn't mean to 'rant')

Happy new year

Lawrence

Mel Carriere from Snowbound and down in Northern Colorado on January 02, 2016:

Scientists are bought and paid for, just like politicians. The whole idea of corporate funding of University research needs to be reexamined. I have my own thoughts on the ethical treatment of laboratory animals. I have long thought that the reasons why biologists insist that animal behavior is purely "instinctive," meaning animals have no feelings and exercise no logic, is so that scientists can continue to justify killing these "dumb brutes" in experiments. Powerful, well written article. Happy New Year!

Paul Swendson on December 28, 2015:

I see what you are saying, but one could argue that there is one core ethic that all true scientists share: a commitment to seeking truth, wherever it might lead. Scientists who help generate industrial products that do harm often participate in concealing (or at least not revealing) truth, and when scientists start doing that, they cease to be true scientists.

They should be putting out all of the information that they find and let the general public respond accordingly. Too often, however, scientists are discouraged from conducting studies that could have negative repercussions for the rich and powerful, or their vision may be clouded by their own biases.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on December 25, 2015:

Robert

it is more "the principle of the thing" which would hopefully lead on to greater responsibility and law.

The idea is to make part of the scientific method 1.what are the possible repercussions, and 2. can these be cleaned up or rectified.

New inventions for example need to have built in "clean" components. Let's say for example if 19th Century chimneys were attached to another (missing ) component that made solid bricks out of coal smoke instead of releasing it into the air.

In the case of radioactive waste there should be safe ways to neutralise the waste. I assume that invention is far off in the distant future instead of now like it should be.

Robert Sacchi on December 25, 2015:

Interesting Hub. Couldn't a consequence of a "scientific Hippocratic oath" be stunting the practical application of science? "Do no harm" looks good but it could mean doing nothing to address a problem and doing harm by default.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on November 17, 2015:

DDE

I wanted to do better research but there is almost nothing available on ethics in science! Even wiki only has sketchy unofficial info that has no authority. Therefore I focused on the basic fact of the absence of ethics in science.

Devika Primić from Dubrovnik, Croatia on November 14, 2015:

Interesting and informative. A well-researched hub. Something to think about from you.

Lawrence Hebb from Hamilton, New Zealand on November 13, 2015:

Good luck with that :-)

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on November 13, 2015:

Greed needs to be outlawed. It's a dream but one day it might happen.

Lawrence Hebb from Hamilton, New Zealand on November 13, 2015:

Many universities do have 'ethics committees' and even governments 'use' them but the issues are (1) They lag behind where the research is and (2) Not everyone on the committee has the same standards!

For me in the 70s there was a place near where I lived doing secret research on the effects of smoking using dogs (animal experiments). Then we find out the tobacco companies already knew the damage it does and had known from their own research in the 50s (twenty years of research considered at the time to be important was actually a waste as the research had already been done!)

By the way the 70s research was only found out when animal activists broke into the lab and kidnapped the animals!

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on November 13, 2015:

I agree.

There are just no ethics at the research level and it goes all the way up from there.

Lawrence Hebb from Hamilton, New Zealand on November 13, 2015:

Oz

This is a 'thought provoking' hub, I think the biggest problem is that ethics is always playing 'catch up' and science is accelerating so fast that it can never fully do so!

In medicine even the Hypocratic oath has changed to reflect the advances, today's oath simply says "Do no harm" (a far cry from heal the sick).

I think the real problem is the erosion of the 'moral compass' that's happened.

Andrew Petrou (author) from Brisbane on November 12, 2015:

I tried to make it very simple: no real ethics yet exist for scientists yet it's the 21st Century.

Should they be allowed to tow an asteroid to earth or build those unpredictable "atom colliders".

Duane Townsend from Detroit on November 07, 2015:

Great hub, it asks some very important questions. Too many scientists seem to be for sale lately.

Related Articles