| Pet_Sounds |
08-31-2019 12:47 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarieMarie
(Post 2075534)
Interesting. Why would you be against it? I think that the applications of discoveries should not really be a scientist's responsibility, and this pledge might get into the way of scientific progress. However, awareness of possible scientific consequences is important. There are probably better ways to deal with that: more courses in ethics and science-related philosophy might be a good idea
|
For those reasons basically. Much of math is so far removed from applications that it makes no sense to hold mathematicians accountable for the consequences of their work, which may be realized decades after their deaths. The same goes for a lot of scientific research, imo.
Similarly, I wouldn't want writers to be required to take a pledge holding them responsible for the effects of their books. In general I feel that human interest is best served by letting the theoreticians proceed unfettered and holding the people who actually build things responsible for the consequences.
The thrust of the article seems to be aimed at computer scientists (whom it mistakenly labels as "computer engineers"). I guess we could make some sort of ethics training mandatory as part of a programmer's first week on the job. It's already required in most degree programs though.
Also, engineers (at least in North America) already have their own version of the Hippocratic Oath. |
