sitemap | help
Click here to access to our stories featuring images from our collections and related materials ranging from Unusual takes, voices to biographies and more. Click here to find a feature debate and other debates related to some of our subjects and topics found with the READ section, please note, you need to be a registered user to participate in debates Click here to browse or search for images and related materials.  Alternatively use the advanced search for more detailed queries. Click here to create your own web galleries using our image collections or to personalise your experience within Ingenious.  Please note that you need to be a registered user to work with the CREATE tools.  Go to the 'Register' link to utilise Ingenious Create Tools Menu Log in Menu Search
Spacer image
Spacer image
save to my links [ + ]Debate caption
Spacer image
Should science be censored?
Do scientists need to be morally responsible or should science be amoral?

What arena should science and scientists move in when conducting research? Should scientists be free to study and research any areas in science and technology or do they have a duty to be "responsible" to their public?

Debate started 19/02/2004
REPLIES POSTED: 20
Spacer image
BACKGROUND:

Click here to take part in the debate

(Please note that this is a Dana Centre debate and will therefore open in a new window)

 

Spacer imageSpacer image
Name / Country Comment
Mike Posted 19/02/2004 11:43
Don't post here please....
Spacer image
RJ Posted 27/06/2004 17:59
United States I believe that the majority of scientists take the amoral stance to justify their actions. Civilized people must possess moral guidlines to live by. Otherwise, we are no better than animals or savages. Scientists have an obligation to conduct themselves in a responsible manner, just as are the rest of society. You can't shirk your moral responsibilities, just by choosing to ignore they exist or matter.
Spacer image
TechnoDragon Posted 27/06/2004 18:24
United States Reminder here folks. WWII, Hitler. He kidnapped , captured or hired large numbers of scientists to research on humans. At the end of the war the documents found outlining his research were read and it was found that they did some horrifying things to subjects in the effort to advance medicine and sciencs. At that time all of the countries involved decided to either destroy or lock away all of the information. This despite the fact that Hitler's scientists had made incredible brakthroughs in medicine. The thought behind it...the amoral way the results were acquired did not justify the results.
Spacer image
Jack Posted 27/06/2004 20:30
United States To learn by research is a must, however responsibility to the public at large is a necessity.
Spacer image
cliff Posted 29/07/2004 22:42
United Kingdom Science must surely be amoral by definition as it is research into what exists in our world and universe around us. As for how the research is carried out and what the end results are used for must be an ethical issue decided by society at the time.
Spacer image
Next >
 
Click here to print this page in a printer friendly format  > Printer friendly version > Back to top
© NMSI. All rights reserved. | terms of use | sitemap | contact us | accessibility | privacy | who we are
Spacer image
Spacer image
See caption

See caption

Log in to have your say
Spacer image
EMAIL:
Spacer image
PASSWORD:
Spacer image
> New member register here.