Abstract
In this paper, I will discuss the responsibilities that scientists have for ensuring their work is interpreted correctly. I will argue that there are three good reasons for scientists to work to ensure the appropriate communication of their findings. First, I will argue that scientists have a general obligation to ensure scientific research is communicated properly based on the vulnerability of others to the misrepresentation of their work. Second, I will argue that scientists have a special obligation to do so because of the power we as a society invest in them as specialists and professionals. Finally, I will argue that scientists ought to ensure their work is interpreted correctly based on prudential, self-interested considerations. I will conclude by offering suggestions regarding policy considerations.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 215-220 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | NanoEthics |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2010 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Speak No Evil: Scientists, Responsibility, and the Public Understanding of Science'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver