NanoEthics 14 (2):135-153 (2020)

Abstract
This paper presents scientists’ understanding of their roles in society and corresponding responsibilities. It discusses the researchers’ perspective against the background of the contemporary literature on scientific responsibility in the social sciences and philosophy and proposes a heuristic that improves the understanding of the complexity of scientific responsibility. The study is based on qualitative interviews with senior scientists. The presented results show what researchers themselves see as their responsibilities, how they assume them, and what challenges they perceive with respect to their responsibilities. Regarding the latter, the interviewed researchers highlight those aspects of responsibility that go beyond the expertise of their professional role, and thus cannot be carried by scientists alone. For example, scientists alone cannot determine the general direction science takes, or the useful application of their research. The interviewed researchers describe those challenges as responsibilities that must be shared across different societal groups. In the theoretical literature, responsibility has been described as a relation between an actor, the action for which someone is responsible, and the normative framework against which someone is responsible. We will draw on this concept of “relational responsibility” to identify the various actors, normative frameworks, and actions relevant to scientific responsibility. This will serve as a heuristic tool to help identify the entanglement of responsibilities spread across several societal groups.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11569-020-00365-5
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 55,873
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal.Heather E. Douglas - 2009 - University of Pittsburgh Press.
Role Obligations.Michael Hardimon - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 91 (7):333-363.

View all 30 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ten Standard Objections to Qualitative Research Interviews.Steinar Kvale - 1994 - Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 25 (2):147-173.
A Phenomenological Perspective On Some Phenomenographic Results On Learning.Amedeo Giorgi - 1999 - Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 30 (2):68-93.
Co-Responsibility for Research Integrity.Carl Mitcham - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):273-290.
The Moral Terrain of Science.Heather Douglas - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S5):1-19.
Scientists' Thoughts on Scientific Models.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 2002 - Perspectives on Science 10 (3):275-301.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-03-31

Total views
10 ( #836,216 of 2,401,778 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #551,897 of 2,401,778 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes