Social responsibility of a scientist

Authors: Gubanov N.N., Cheremnykh L.G. Published: 19.12.2023
Published in issue: #6(104)/2023  
DOI: 10.18698/2306-8477-2023-6-877  
Category: Noname  
Keywords: scientific ethos, post-non-classical science, Pugwash movement, Russell–Einstein Manifesto, ethical examination

The paper considers necessity for ethical regulation of the scientific activity. It demonstrates the increasing ethical component in the development of society in general and of science in particular, which is conditioned by the law of techno-humanitarian balance. To prevent the negative and even fatal consequences in the scientific and technological development, sufficient cultural and primarily, moral regulations are required. The future of society is largely determined by the completeness in understanding the moral imperative. Risks arising in the course of scientific and technological evolution are analyzed. Awareness of their existence since the second half of the XX century makes the problem of moral assessment of the scientists’ activities and their social responsibility for the results quite urgent. The paper shows the role of the World Organization of Scientists, Pugwash Movement and other organizations of scientists in fighting against militarization of science, arms race, for nuclear disarmament and peace. When considering the post-non-classical science ethos, position is substantiated that modern scientists should bear double moral responsibility. They should be responsible for both complying with the scientific internal ethos (preventing plagiarism, empirical data falsification, etc.) and for social consequences of using the results of their scientific and scientific-technical activities, for inadmissibility of their inhumane application. An important form of connection between intrascientific ethos and extrascientific values and goals is the mandatory ethical examination of scientific projects and programs. The science ethical component significantly reduces the likelihood of inhumane application of the scientific knowledge and the unintended negative consequences of the scientific experiments.



[1] Gubanov N.I., Gubanov N.N. Osnovnye normy nauchnogo etosa [Basic norms of the scientific ethos]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Filosofiya i konfliktologiya — Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2021, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 416–427. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2021.304
[2] Yudin B.G. Etika nauki i otvetstvennos’ uchenogo [Ethics of science and responsibility of a scientist]. In: Kuptsov V.I. Filosofiya i metodologiya nauki [Philosophy and Methodology of Science]. Part II. Moscow, SvR–Argus Publ., 1994, pp. 132–154.
[3] Nazaretyan A.P. Nelineynoe budushchee i problema zhiznennykh smyslov [The non-linear future and the problem of life meanings]. Istoricheskaya psikhologiya i sotsiologiya istorii — Historical Psychology and Sociology, 2012, no. 2, pp. 148–180.
[4] Nazaretyan A.P. Antropogennye krizisy i evolyutsiya nenasiliya [Anthropogenic crises and the evolution of nonviolence]. Filosofskie nauki — Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, 2004, no. 7, pp. 5–33.
[5] Moiseev N.N. Sovremennyi ratsionalizm [Modern rationalism]. Moscow, MGVP KOKS Publ., 1995, 377 p.
[6] Gubanov N.N., Cheremnykh L.G. Nashe budushchee – neochelovek ili postchelovek? [Is our future neo-human or post-human?]. Gumanitarnyi vestnik — “Humanities Bulletin” of BMSTU, 2023, no. 5. https://10.18698/2306-8477-2023-5-866
[7] Gubanov N.I., Gubanov N.N. Riski v sovremennom obshchestve [Risks in modern society]. Moscow, Etnosotsium Publ., 2020, 220 p.
[8] Guseynov A.A. Etika nauki [Ethics of science]. Prikladnaya etika v sovremennoy Rossii: vchera, segodnya, zavtra. Vedomosti prikladnoy etiki — Applied ethics in modern Russia: yesterday, today, tomorrow. Semestrial papers of applied ethics, 2017, iss. 50, pp. 103–116.
[9] Nauka i vlast [Science and power]. For People. Science. You. Available at: https://forpsy.ru/works/nauka-i-vlast (accessed November 26, 2023).
[10] Gubanov N.I., Gubanov N.N. Normy nauchnoy deyatelnosti [Norms of scientific activity]. Moscow, Etnosotsium Publ., 2021, 196 p.
[11] Manifest Rassela—Eynshteyna (1955) [Russell—Einstein Manifesto (1955)]. Russkaya ideya v filosofii, logike, obshchestve — Russian idea in philosophy, logic, society. Available at: https://russian-idea-in.livejournal.com/647.html (accessed November 26, 2023).
[12] Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe znanie [Theoretical knowledge]. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiya Publ., 2003, 744 p.
[13] Gubanov N.N., Gubanov N.I. Istoriya nauchnykh idey skvoz prizmu istorii idey filosofskikh [The history of scientific ideas through the prism of the history of philosophical ideas]. Dialog so vremenem. Almanakh intellektualnoy istorii — Dialogue with time. Intellectual History Review, 2021, no. 76, pp. 5–19.
[14] Stepin V.S. Evolyutsiya etosa nauki: ot klassicheskoy k postneklassicheskoy ratsionalnosti [The evolution of the ethos of science: from classical to post-non-classical rationality]. In: Kiyashchenko L.P., Mirskaya E.Z. eds. Etos nauki [Ethos of Science]. Moscow, Academia Publ., 2008, pp. 21–47.
[15] Postneklassicheskiy period razvitiya nauki [Post-non-classical period of development of science]. Available at: https://lektsii.org/12-79272.html (accessed November 26, 2023).