20140130 LAquila quake Italy scientists guilty of manslaughter Scientific Point of View Responsibility of Scienctists Should the scientists be responsible for negative effect or catastrophe ID: 659632
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Criminal scientists Dominik, Dmitry, Gir..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Criminal scientists
Dominik, Dmitry, Girma, Jia and Ruisheng
2014-01-30Slide2
L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists guilty of manslaughterSlide3
Scientific Point of View
Responsibility of Scienctists
Should the scientists be responsible for negative effect or catastrophe?
Whether the scientists tell the truth or cast for general public?
Role of Science
Exploring unknown and/or solving problems?
Can science solve all of the problems?Slide4
From point of view of society
Did experts act in an ethical way?
Scientific responsibility
Objectivity, error estimation
Social responsibility
Official role, political influence, communication
Ethical to sue the commission?
Scientists did nothing wrong
Prediction impossible, Scientists can't exclude earthquake
Judges will answer the question of guilt
Victims opinion is checked by the courtSlide5
Was it ethical for the court to hold a trial on the scientists?
Did the jury and judge have the scientific knowledge to judge the scientists???
Wasn’t it necessary to have a specially kind of court where the scientists could have been judged by scientists?Slide6
FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE TODAY:
Should we pursue research in all directions? If yes, who will collect knowledge, administrate them, and take a decision in the end?
What is post-science and how does the World look like after science?
SCIENTIFIC ADMINISTRATION:
Does the state still pose the questions to Science?
Administrative organization of science is no longer adequate! The research community was not able to detect the problem in time. What kind of institution we want after reformation?
Does one need particular specialization?
CONCLUDING REMARKS