If you have come to science or media seriously, sooner or later you will have to think about ethical issues.
Ethical questions arise at the intersection of the rational nature of science as a method of cognition and science as a social institution. On the one hand, research in its purest form has no moral constraints. On the other hand, this process depends on social norms, under the influence of which the author's personality was formed. The very results of scientific discoveries determine the vector of development of society, which imposes a certain moral responsibility on the scientist.
Each published text slightly changes the reality. You are mistaken if you think that nobody needs another article about the “essence of cybersecurity”. For many, it may be the first on this topic. Therefore, it depends on the quality of your work whether the casual reader will continue to study the issue further or decide that science is boring and difficult. To write like a pro, you need to learn from the best, for this there is a service https://essaypay.com/ pay for someone to write my essay, which helps you write an excellent article in the shortest possible time and pay a fair amount for it. After such an article, a casual reader will definitely go further into the study of this topic, or at least tell others about it.
How ideology interferes with science
Often ethical restrictions are imposed on science from the outside and become instruments of ideological control. Many people know that genetics was banned in the USSR for a long time, and the only approved trend in philosophy was Marxism-Leninism. But ideological repressions also affected such fundamental things as Einstein's theory of relativity. The concept was criticized for insufficient "materialism", and some Soviet physicists tried to offer their own ideologically correct interpretation. However, as soon as it became clear that the rewriting of physical laws was preventing the USSR from creating its own nuclear bomb, all ideological restrictions were instantly discarded. Religion, traditions and scientific truth Topics related to religious traditions and death are ethically difficult scientific problems. Do the dead have rights? Does a person have the right to euthanasia? Is it possible to introduce a presumption of consent to organ donation? There are no single correct answers. Each person will express the point of view that corresponds to his personal ethical picture of the world. Conducting research or deciding to publish the results, you may encounter moral contradictions. On the one hand, there is impartial scientific truth. On the other hand, condemnation and repression from society or potential harm from using your work.
When making complex moral and ethical decisions, we resort to one or another concept of justice, even if we are not aware of it. Let's talk about what ethical principles can be guided by.
Utilitarianism - the ethicality of an act depends on its consequences or "the end justifies the means." Supporters of this concept can act both from the point of view of some "common good" and personal gain. Utilitarianism is one of the popular varieties of consequentialist philosophy.
Utilitarianism always focuses on the needs of the majority. If an act does more good than harm, the utilitarian recognizes it as morally correct. For example, in the case of mass vaccination, the utilitarian would consider the risk of serious complications in 2% of the population to be negligible if we get herd immunity as a result.
Deontology - the ethics of an act does not depend on the results that it will bring or "do what you must, and let it be what will be." Proponents of deontological ethics believe that it is necessary to evaluate the act in itself, regardless of external circumstances and results.
The deontological approach is characteristic of most religious teachings (“do not kill”, “do not steal”). Deontology is at the heart of modern medical ethics. The doctor must treat the patient, regardless of who is in front of him - a criminal or a clergyman.
At first glance, deontology seems more virtuous than dry utilitarianism. In fact, everything is more difficult. For example, from the point of view of deontology, any theft is unacceptable. From a consequentialist point of view, the right thing to do would be to create a Sci-Hub.
You will also be interested in: