Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:06:10.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scientific Research and Discretion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2009

Paul Hanly
Paul Hanly
Affiliation:
Georgetown University Law Center
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In ‘Scientific Research and Moral Rectitude’ Robert Hoffman defends the scientific community against critics who maintain that ‘the researcher's claim to freedom of inquiry should be upheld only if his discovery does not adversely affect mankind….’ He uses two arguments in his defence, both of which purport to show that this sort of criticism is logically misconceived.

Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy , Volume 53 , Issue 203 , January 1978 , pp. 109 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Philosophy 50 (1975), 475–477.Google Scholar

2 Ibid., 475.

3 International Herald-Tribune, 10 02 1976.Google Scholar

4 Op. cit., 476.Google Scholar

5 Ibid.

6 We should note that Hoffman's view of the moral (non-)responsibility of scientists has the further absurd consequence that it is au fond ‘senseless’ to praise scientists for discoveries which have beneficial effects. If we ought not to blame a scientist for his government's use of his discoveries in waging chemical warfare, then on what grounds ought we to praise a scientist for discovering a cure for cancer, say? (Assuming that the scientist does not himself go about administering the cure to various patients.)

7 I wish to thank A. P. Valiunas for his criticisms of my style.