Graduate studies at Western
Nanoethics 4 (1):1-12 (2010)
|Abstract||Little if any of the scholarly literature on nanotechnology (NT) and ethics is directed at NT researchers. Many of these practitioners believe that having clear ethical guidelines for the conduct of NT research is necessary. This work attempts to provide such guidelines. While no qualitatively new ethical issues unique to NT have yet been identified, the ethical responsibilities identified below merit serious attention by NT researchers. Thirteen specific ethical responsibilities arising at three levels are identified. They are derived by applying four fundamental ethical responsibilities of scientists and engineers to the specific conditions of NT research and researchers in contemporary Western societies. Since society is placing increasing importance on producing scientists and engineers who combine high technical competence with a sensitive ethical compass, study of the ethical dimension of NT, including the identified ethical responsibilities, should become a required element of the formal education of all NT researchers.|
|Keywords||Nanotechnology Ethics Ethical issues unique to nanotechnology Ethical responsibility and ethical responsibilities Fundamental ethical responsibilities of scientists and engineers Ethical responsibilities of nanotechnology researchers Micro-social Meso-social, and macro-social levels Guide Ethical dimension of nanotechnology Formal education of nanotechnology researchers|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Rosalyn W. Berne (2006). Nanotalk: Conversations with Scientists and Engineers About Ethics, Meaning, and Belief in the Development of Nanotechnology. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brian Schrag, Gloria Ferrell, Vivian Weil, Tristan J. Fiedler, Gloria Ferrell, Vivian Weil & Tristan J. Fiedler (2003). Barking Up the Wrong Tree? Industry Funding of Academic Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (4):569-582.
Roshan D. Ahuja, Mary Walker & Raghu Tadepalli (2001). Paternalism, Limited Paternalism and the Pontius Pilate Plight When Researching Children. Journal of Business Ethics 32 (1):81 - 92.
Sandra T. Sigmon (1995). Ethical Practices and Beliefs of Psychopathology Researchers. Ethics and Behavior 5 (4):295 – 309.
Michael Kalichman (2002). Ethical Decision-Making in Research: Identifying All Competing Interests. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (2):215-218.
Robert E. McGinn (2010). What's Different, Ethically, About Nanotechnology?: Foundational Questions and Answers. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 4 (2):115-128.
David J. Pittenger (1994). The Cross-Disciplinary Ethical Responsibilities of Psychology Faculty. Ethics and Behavior 4 (3):199 – 208.
Ralph W. Giacobbe & Madhav N. Segal (2000). A Comparative Analysis of Ethical Perceptions in Marketing Research: U.S.A. Vs. Canada. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 27 (3):229 - 245.
Guillermo Foladori, Noela Invernizzi & Edgar Záyago (2009). Two Dimensions of the Ethical Problems Related to Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 3 (2):121-127.
Robert McGinn (2008). Ethics and Nanotechnology: Views of Nanotechnology Researchers. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 2 (2):101-131.
Added to index2010-02-15
Total downloads42 ( #31,808 of 739,631 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,631 )
How can I increase my downloads?