چکیده:
Science and ethics have always held a special status for humanity. It is often assumed that the actors in the field of science, namely scientists, always only concern themselves with what is within the scope of their work regarding what is, and have no concern for what ought to be. This view inevitably leads to the thesis of the neutrality of science towards values. The author of the present article presents another thesis, based on which value issues, especially ethical issues, are intertwined with scientific research. Those who, in order to adorn science, argue for its refinement from values, have erred regarding the nature of scientific research. Scientific research cannot be carried out without confronting value and ethical issues. Therefore, one must think of a solution to these issues, rather than ignoring them or attempting to hide them. Examples of this confrontation have been collected in the present article.
خلاصه ماشینی:
On one hand, the scientist, for their part, must recognize that science has such intrinsic dignity and status that its proponents do not need to claim that, despite science being the work of imperfect humans, it possesses superhuman powers in some mysterious way; such as the claim that we have reached real achievements, when in fact they are very distant ideals and, in some cases, ideals that are not scientific or achievable at all; so that someone might have a completely open mind, judge completely objectively, and look completely rationally.
In particular, we have seen that questions regarding the purely ethical nature of scientific research arise in the following pivotal situations: 1- Selection of research objectives 2- Employment of individuals in research activities 3- Selection of research methods 4- Determining standards of proof 5- Publication of research findings 6- Control of scientific misinformation 7- Allocation of credit to research achievements In short, it seems permissible to claim that in every situation of scientific research work, from the beginning of the work to the final report of its complete findings, issues with a specific ethical character present themselves to be resolved and addressed.
Any report of empirical examples in which the perceptions, values, and personal characteristics of scientists have influenced their work or affected their findings is dismissed with this derogatory dichotomy, which suggests that such issues might have an effect on the psychology or sociology of scientific research, but have no connection to the logic of science.
And this is certainly a problem related to the ethical implications arising from the fact that scientists have a specific duty toward the advancement of science itself as a progressing human endeavor.
(
, 
, 
)
