Moral responsibility and the 'ignorant scientist'

Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (3):341-349 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The question whether a scientist can be responsible for an outcome of her work which she does not foresee, and so is ignorant of, is addressed. It is argued that ignorance can be a ground for the attribution of responsibility, on condition that there are general principles, rules or norms, that the subject should be aware of. It is maintained that there are such rules which inform the practice of science as a social institution.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Corporate Moral Responsibility.Michael J. Phillips - 1995 - Business Ethics Quarterly 5 (3):555-576.
The Moral Responsibility of the Scientist.Andrew Belsey - 1978 - Philosophy 53 (203):113 - 118.
Is there an ivory tower in reality?E. Mamchur - 1990 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (1):101 – 111.
Recent Work on Moral Responsibility.Elinor Mason - 2005 - Philosophical Books 46 (4):343-353.
Diagnosing blame: Responsibility and the psychopath.Carl Elliott - 1992 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (2):199-214.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
170 (#114,754)

6 months
2 (#1,205,524)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Forge
University College, London (Alumnus)

References found in this work

Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility.John Martin Fischer & Mark Ravizza - 1998 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Mark Ravizza.
General principles of criminal law.Jerome Hall - 1960 - Clark, N.J.: Lawbook Exchange.

Add more references