Scientific misconduct: The lessons of time: Commentary on “The history and future of the office of research integrity: Scientific conduct and beyond”

Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):199-202 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Pascal’s paper indicates how far we have come. Now as then, however, there is a need to reflect from outside the cocoon of our agencies, institutions, and disciplines to behold the enterprise that shapes both our behavior and our interpretations of it. For the boundary separating propriety from impropriety continues to move. Just as science, and the knowledge it begets, continues to evolve, so must our collective standards. The lessons of time include this: ORI or biomedical research is no island; each is connected to a body of practitioners who are accountable to a society that is ever-more skeptical of expert knowledge and the institutions entrusted with its development. We are participants in a process of continuous improvement , not occupants of a state of grace. For the good of the enterprise we cherish, it is best that we all remember that

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
12 (#1,062,297)

6 months
1 (#1,516,429)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Allocating Credit and Blame in Science.Daryl E. Chubin - 1988 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 13 (1-2):53-63.
They Blinded Us with ‘Science’? [REVIEW]Daryl E. Chubin - 1983 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 8 (4):23-29.

Add more references