Some Thoughts on Scientific Responsibility

1
Some Thoughts on Scientific Responsibility

• John Weckert
• Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics
• Charles Sturt University
• Australian National University
• University of Melbourne

2
Overview

• Responsibility
• Six considerations
• Double effect
• Dual use
• Collingridge dilemma
• Prediction
• Collective responsibility
• If we dont others will
• Some conclusions

3
Scientific responsibility

• Responsibility to do good science
• Any attempt at guiding scientific research
  towards a purpose other than its own is an
  attempt to deflect it from the advancement of
  science (Polanyi,1962).
• Scientific progress results from the free play
  of free intellects, in the manner dictated by
  their curiosity for exploration of the unknown.
  (Bush, 1945)

4
European Commission

• Researchers and research organisations should
  remain accountable for the social, environmental
  and human health impacts that their NN research
  may impose on present and future generations
  (code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and
  nanotechnologies research, 2008)

5
Responsibility

• Causal responsibility
• Role responsibility
• Moral responsibility
• (Individual v Collectivity responsibility)

6
2. Double Effect/Unintended Consequences

• Thomas Aquinas A single act may have two
  effects, of which only one is intended, while
  the other is incidental to that intention. But
  the way in which a moral act is to be classified
  depends on what is intended

7
Double Effect/Unintended Consequences

• consequences that are both foreseen and
  intentional
• consequences that are foreseen and unintentional
• consequences that are unforeseen
• 1 - responsibility
• 2 alternatives?
• 3 -some unforeseen consequences should have been
  foreseen

8
3. Dual Use

• Any products, software or technology that can be
  used for both civil and military purposes are
  dual-use items.
• Not the sense used here

9
Dual Use

• The so-called dual use dilemma arises in the
  context of research in the biological and other
  sciences as a consequence of the fact that one
  and the same piece of scientific research
  sometimes has the potential to be used for harm
  as well as for good. (Miller and Selgelid)  

10
Dual Use

• It is an ethical dilemma since it is about
  promoting good in the context of the potential
  for also causing harm
• Ethical dilemmas should be solved not by simply
  weighing up the potential benefits against the
  potential harms, but rather by finding other
  alternatives.

11
4. The Collingridge Dilemma

• Either a technology is in a relatively early
  stage of development when it is unknown what
  changes should be made, or a technology is in a
  relatively late stage of development when change
  is expensive, difficult and time-consuming.
• If the former, then control is not possible.
• If the latter, then control is not feasible.
• Therefore, either controlling technology is not
  possible, or controlling technology is not
  feasible
• So there can be no responsibility
• BUT it is not a real dilemma!

12
5. Prediction

• The consequences of research cannot be predicted
• Therefore responsibility for consequences does
  not arise

13
Prediction

• "I think there is a world market for maybe five
  computers."
• Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943
• "640K ought to be enough for anybody."
• Bill Gates, 1981

14
Prediction

• "Radio has no future."
• "X-rays are clearly a hoax."
• "The aeroplane is scientifically impossible."
• Royal Society president William Thomson, Lord
  Kelvin, 1897-9.

15
Prediction

• Eric Drexler distinguishes between predicting
  future scientific knowledge and engineering
  developments
• Some prediction is reasonable
• Extrapolation from known cases
• Eg. use of surveillance technology
• Vision assessment (Grünwald)

16
1. Collective responsibility

• Science is collaborative (collective)
• No individual can be held responsible
• BUT if what the group does is morally
  questionably and I accept it, I am morally
  tainted (May)

17
6. If we dont others willThe problem

• Tennis rackets
• If we dont manufacture tennis rackets containing
  nanoparticles someone else will
• Bionics
• We might worry about where bionics will lead, but
  the R D will be done anyway by someone
• Both statements are probably true
• Are these good arguments?

18
Justification

• The world wont be a better place if we do not,
  because the developments will still happen
• It may be a worse place because we have better
  safeguards
• We will miss out and others will benefit
• So we should do it and cannot be held responsible
  for any harms

19
If we dont others will Arguments against

• If something is wrong we should not do it, even
  if others will
• (deontological argument)
• If we do it, it will give a bad example to others
• If we dont it will set a good example
• (consequentialist argument)

20
If we dont others will

• Metaphysical guilt even if no moral
  responsibility
• We are responsible for the kind of people that we
  are
• Moral taint

21
If we dont others willSome considerations

• How bad is the action?
• How much harm will it cause?
• How much less harm will be caused if we do it
  than if someone else does?
• How much more will it benefit us if we do it than
  someone else if they do it?
• How certain is it that if we dont do it someone
  else will?
• Do we want to be morally tainted?

22
Conclusion

• All arguments can be reasonable in some
  circumstances
• All can be (often are) used as excuses
• There is a need for more and continued
  examination of the issues underlying these
  arguments

23
Albert Einstein

• 'In our time, scientists and engineers carry a
  particularly heavy burden of moral
  responsibility, because the development of
  military means of mass destruction is dependent
  on their work.'

24
Joseph Rotblat

• believed that scientists should always be
  concerned with the ethical consequences of their
  work.
• was the only physicist to leave the Manhattan
  Project on the grounds of conscience

25
Leonardo da Vinci
26
Leonardo da Vinci

• How and why is it that I do not describe my
  method for remaining underwater and how long I
  can remain there without coming up for air? I do
  not wish to divulge or publish this because of
  the evil nature of men, who might use it for
  murder on the sea-bed (quoted in White, 2000,
  206).