Science

Abstract

We live in an unethical society, but perhaps all societies are unethical. It may be a normal condition for human organizations that rules, like phonograph records, are made to be broken. There is no need here to litanize the obvious unethical conduct that surrounds us daily. We have survived a philandering President, the Blue Wall of silence of the police (who will not police themselves), insider traders on Wall Street, and an unconscionable, invasive, undeclared war with a non-threatening country at peace with us half a world away. The list is endless and the entries all too familiar, but the point here is that along with the moral backsliders and others at the bottom grabbing for more than they earn or deserve, our leaders commonly indulge in unethical conduct at the top.In its most general form, unethical conduct by our leaders is simply another form of power politics. It is a way for those in the establishment to stay established. It is not enough that they can make the rules (and laws) to suit themselves and then selectively enforce them to help themselves: For some reason, they feel free if not compelled to break the rules as well. Perhaps this is all as obvious as unethical conduct is itself, but to those super-egoists who believe in ideals, there is a need to address the most serious problem confronting our civilization. Surprisingly, it is not a problem of politics-nor of economics, social values, ecology, or overpopulation. It is a problem of ethics (or lack thereof). It is the question of whether or not we are going to abide by our own standards of conduct. And, more to the point, are our leaders going to do so?This is a more perplexing problem for those of us in the scientific community because we are the educated elite of society. Only the medical profession could possibly rival us in formal education, and we might justly claim physicians to be our own. However, for all our formal training, something is obviously missing. Somewhere along the way, some of us got lost in a maze of egoism and strayed from what we are supposed to be doing. Worse yet, so have some of our leaders.1Like all academicians, scientists are supposed to be searching for the truth. All the codification of methodology in science is directed toward that end, but without the guiding ethic of an innocent commitment to truth, all the intellectual training in the world is wasted if not perverted by those committed to promoting their own images. It may be that those with Machiavellian personalities simply have risen to the posts of authority in science as they have in most other fields. They are the people who crave power and love to wield it, so the others, who are devoted to their ideals, let the power mongers have their sway, but beyond that, a number of factors built into the minds of scientists and the fabric of science contribute to its corruption.We can start by recognizing the occasional failure of conscience of individual scientists themselves and then deal with the pressure generated by the publish or perish syndrome and the failure of the several institutional mechanisms which are supposed to promote self-correction but foster corruption instead. Among these are the referee system for evaluating articles submitted to journals, the peer review process for judging grant proposals, the practice of replicating reported experimental results, professional organizations' disciplinary processes, and the role of the media in putting the spotlight of attention on those who err.Of all of these, the conscience of the individual scientist is most crucial. Indeed it is central in that all of the institutional mechanisms are effected by people according to their consciences. It is rather trite but nonetheless impor- tant to note that most scientists are ethical most of the time. While we focus here on the constant failings of intellectual morality among the few and the occasional lapses among the many, we must recognize that the individual conscience is the first bastion of ethical conduct in science. …