Dear Yogesh,

I would not expect to see here negative answer to your question. It would be equal to giving box of matches to kids to lit a fire in the middle of parents bedroom.

I guess you are right: modern science education could include ethical and societal impact issues. A good example is: environmental science.

I fully agree; it should include impact issues like:  environment, ethics, morality, and societal and humane values.

Science education must include ethics and the well being of society has to be central.  First and foremost, we are ethical humans...

Thank you for raising this question. I am completely agree with you. Our children should must be taught since the beginning about the pros and cons of materialistic development in the name of infrastructure, health, economy, defence. Our children should be enriched with good education to avoid the current scenario going on throughout the world. 

Dear Yogesh,

Is it a poetic question?

The answer is yes!

Of course dear Yogesh. Science has brought improvements and advantages, but at the same time it has also brought adverse effects like pollution of the environment; misuse and abuse of resources and threat to the human society as you stated.

Social media is one of the examples of the science improvements. It has positive and at the same time negatives on individuals and families. Scientists should in general work on reducing the abuse and threats to humankind and even to industry.

We do not ask questions, that we know the answer! Of course YES!

@Alex - You are right; the question may not collect any negative answer. Prof. Andras has referred it as poetic question. Any thing which is earnestly desirable but doesn’t actually happen appears to be idealistic or dreamy. In fact ethical considerations have traditionally been excluded from scientific discussions. This tradition possibly has its roots in the desire of the scientific community to avoid the controversies and social considerations are consciously or involuntarily ignored by the profiteering groups thereby often misleading the consumers as mentioned by Barbara. The explosive growth of science-driven technology during the last two centuries has changed the world completely. The big problem of our times is to keep society from being shaken to pieces by the headlong progress of science and harmonizing our social, political and educational institutions with technological change. Because of the great importance of the issue, it is perhaps justifiable to solicit whether anyone today can be considered educated without having learnt the impact of science on society.

Hello,

All sciences have their ethical dilemmas. Our everyday life as well. Science is not disconnected from our lives and vice versa. Then ethics must be present in the production of our life and in scientific production. The lack of ethics can lead us to destruction, while recognizing the many benefits that science brings. We need quality of life, as well as our colegaCecília said, but our choices can change. Our options for better quality of life too. Some options can cause more damage than others. Why do we choose certain directions and not others? Why do we insist on war and armaments manufacture? Science is widely involved in this. Because we prefer to kill people instead of killing the hunger of millions of people? Has science involved in this discussion as well. Ethical dilemmas involved in science must conform to universal human values , the preservation of humanity, with our spiritual evolution and sustainability of the planet.

Regards,

S.

Of course dear @Yogesh. New ALLEA (European Association of Academies of Science and Humanities) Statement released – Ethics education in science. " The statement highlights the need for adequate tools for ethics education and its integration in the curricula for early career researchers and scientists. It formulates recommendations to universities and academies carrying out or promoting research and emphasises their responsibilities in this context."

http://www.allea.org/Pages/ALL/33/522.bGFuZz1FTkc.html

Here is a good resource about the issue Summary of a Workshop :Ethics Education and Scientific and Engineering Research: What’s Been Learned? What Should Be Done? It is good reading!

http://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=14625

It is indeed a virtue and an act of wisdom to keep  nature sustainable and safe. We are a parasite to nature a host, and a parasite that threatens and debilitates its host is destined to heart self and in danger of disappearance.

The advancement of science only  to intrude nature more to utilize and maximize resources without regard to the impacts we create on it, is tantamount to investing on natural calamity and punishment of humankind and every living species in nature.

The capacity of science should also equally be used to protect and thrive nature and utilize it properly for the sake of continuity. 

Of course. You are right in this issue.

We are aware of what science has brought about to us, particularly improvement of health, advancement in technologies and much more convenience in our daily lives. Likewise, it has also contributes to some adverse effects such as environmental pollution due to misuse and abuse of resources and threat to the human society as mentioned in your question. Radiation is another significant downside if it is managed properly and safely.

Thus, modern science education should include ethical and societal impact issues. A great way to start burying these issues in the minds of our future generations would be through the implementation of environmental science as a subject. Besides that, we as scientists should work ethically and with social consciousness bear in our mind towards reducing the abuse and threats to humankind and industry.

The answer to this question among researchers has always been yes. But the issue of ethics, like plagiarism, while strongly recognized, does not have strong "disciplinary" or penalty system.

As to societal impact, the research community has also long recognized this issue. In fact it is the reason why we have developed the strategies called "Social Impact Assessment" and "Technology Assessment" that will estimate the possible positive and negative effects of a research output or a technology prior to its implementation.

It is encouraging to learn from Prof Kamal that issues  in Q are being taught  at his university since last 3 yrs. European Association of Academies of Science and Humanities Statement also highlights the need for adequate tools for ethics education and its integration in the curricula for early career researchers and scientists as imentioned by Prof Ljubomir. However, It is noted that, at the moment, ethical aspects are seldom included in study programs in academic institutions across the world. It is important to instill in the students a positive attitude towards reflection, alertness and awareness of the ethical dilemmas they may encounter in their professional lives. Future generation must have the ability to distinguish right from wrong and they should learn to respect the basic ethical principles and social responsibilities of science. I also agree with with opinion of dear Eddie that there should be strong "disciplinary" or penalty system.against violation of ethics like  plagiarism, etc.

Dear Sean F Johnston, It is really delighting to know that the  University of Glasgow paying due attention to the ethical societal accountability issues in their course curriculum of various science disciplines. 

Would be "against cultural". Because the entire base of all our culture is economic value of things.

There is nothing in this world without it's disadvantage no matter how good such thing might be so is science. Including such in the teaching of science education is not new to physics education. We already have a course known as environmental physics where students are taught things like pollution, ozone layer, green house effect and many other. Physics education students are taught to know the danger of some scientific  inventions and processes to lives. There is nothing bad in having such in biology and chemistry education if not there already. I hope we know that science education is the study of biology, chemistry and physics in conjunction with principle and method of education. So i am writing this in that context. I am not writing for study of biology, chemistry, physics or any other subjects people called science today.

There is no need to specifically require teaching ethics and social responsibility in science. Ethics and social responsibility are part of a scholarly education. Scientists should have a scholarly education. Ethics in science is no different from ethics in any other profession or career. We are all responsible for our actions and responsible to society.

Some professions and careers require or have established a code of ethics. Science has not formalized a code. The scientific method is near to a code. Scientists should be taught the scientific method as an emphasis for ethics of establishing proof. A scientist is ethically responsible for examining her/his work.

Yogesh asked, "In view of the fact that no discovery is immune from the danger of misuse, would it be desirable to include some discussion of ethics, as well as a review of the history of modern science and its impact on society in contemporary science education system."

How would you apply ethics other than discussion? Addition of an ethics curriculum seems an unnecessary step.

Science is already too strongly influenced by government funding of research. Much of that influence is politically driven and politically, socially responsible. An added necessity to teach ethics and justify research based on possibility of harm could lead to another political lever.

I agree that science should be ethical and socially responsible. I believe ethics should be a part of a scholarly education. Science departments should teach the scientific method and the honest application of investigation and proof.

I think there should be an ethical perspective included into all domains, scientific or otherwise. It is probably more of a pressing requirement for science because of its wide-ranging, long-term impacts, especially on human health and environmental equilibrium. We need to weigh in the balance between practical advantange and metaphysical truths. Although life is full of trade-offs, we must be able to evaluate the compromises and draw reasoned judgments that do not violate the ethical sanctity of a given situation.

Science provides knowledge, knowledge is the foundation for societal advancement, societal advancement improves the quality of life. The greatest flaw in any scientific discipline is the human element. A hypothesis is an idea that evolves from human thought. It is difficult not to introduce bias as all humans have opinions, some are more passionate than others. In my opinion, ethics is essential for all of society, not just scientists. However, omitting ethics from formal training is a mistake as scientists must strive to be unbiased, no matter what their opinions are. Ethics also introduces thinking of how science impacts society and emphasizes the need for responsible science and use of knowledge. Bottom line, ethics is crucial in any discipline and frankly in any job no matter what it is.

Science / Technology drives modern civilization towards new harmonious and sustainable development of human with tools and methods to understand matters, life and human recognizing the natural processes.

http://www.aboutbioscience.org/topics/bioethics

" Should modern science education include ethical and societal impact issues?" considering current situation, I think almost all of the sciecne educators and professionals will agree on some point that its obvious to educate our future generation about the ethical and societal impact issues of science

Beyond all these ethical problems there is another which is equally basic: The speed of change. This is the theme of Future Shock, see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Shock. Toffler defines the term "future shock" as a certain psychological state of individuals and entire societies. His shortest definition for the term is a personal perception of "too much change in too short a period of time". This problem needs also some educational treat.

Dear Bragy,

This is really a problem! The first step would be to confront problems, with a framework outside the standard one! In general we should thing about this and find appropriate solutions!

Dear All, I will contradict to my previous answer - in many cases we are teaching science to over-20-years old people with already fixed ethical principles - made by previous life, education and accepted from family. They can be clever enough to  pretend they are sharing You ethical principles.

it is important  in some cases to treat science as potentially dangerous weapon and limit assess for people who wants to misuse it. But, I have no idea How and Who will do it.  I belive that medical science know  possible ways. I mean something like:

«Per Apollinem medicum et Aesculapium, Hygiamque et Panaceam juro, deos deasque omnes testes citans, mepte viribus et judicio meo hos jusjurandum et hanc stipulationem plene praestaturum.

Illum nempe parentum meorum loco habiturum spondeo, qui me artem istam docuit, eique alimenta impertirurum, et quibuscunque opus habuerit, suppeditaturum...

Yes, absolutely!

It would be very valuable to make students aware of their responsibility towards society/ future generations and to develop their commitment to achieve scientific results that translate into economic, environmental and social progress.

Research organizations and individuals should be as committed to sustainability as the market leading commercial enterprises are.

I think there must be identified national values in consultation with people; and attempts must be made that the education system is devised such as to reflect those values, so as to be more meaningful. 

1. Recognize normative perspectives in educational science and practice

2. Understand various ethical approaches

3. Apply your analytic skills and critical reflection skills

4. Demonstrate ethical awareness in academic professional settings

Radboud University - Radboud Summer School - Ethics and Education

I think training in research ethics  should start in high school and should be able to help students identify and discuss ethical dilemmas by introducing them to important concepts, tools, principles, and methods that can be useful in resolving moral and ethical dilemmas.

In Portugal, these issues must be covered in Natural Sciences teaching, and this has been going on for many years, now. It's called the "CTSA approach", for "Ciência, Tecnologia, Sociedade e Ambiente" (originally it was only CTS). This means that for any curricular unit taught, teachers are encouraged to discuss the impact of scientific advances in society and the environment, usually from a ethical or bioethical point-of-view. All manuals used also have CTSA sections. 

As you say - science can be used for good or evil. Whether a scientist is aware of the ethical considerations to which scientific advance is put may have little or nothing to do with future applications by others. For example dynamite discovered by Alfred Nobel can be used for good or ill, nuclear fission and fusion can be used for good or ill.

Or another example experiments on sensory deprivation have been of considerable value in understanding human psychology: but also have been a powerful weapon in the hands of torturers...Whether the inventors had moral qualms about their discoveries, as they certainly did, has not prevented their adoption for both good and evil ends. So such qualms are irrelevant at the individual's level. Ethical uses of scientific discovery is about more than individual decision making, it has to be a matter of establishing widely accepted public and societal norms and seeing to it that these are obeyed by everyone. The Golden Rule of reciprocity should always apply and if necessary reinforced by international courts of law. 

The ethical tradition in science can possibly be traced back through history to a

compatriot preceding Hooke, to the founder of modern English science: Francis Bacon. To Bacon, science was more than an academic quest for knowledge; it was a systematic study aiming for mastery over nature with the purpose of enabling human beings to improve their life on earth. Bacon was a champion for science on a large and lavishly funded scale because he believed that science could be useful. In his utopia described in New Atlantis (1624) there is a college called Solomon's House "dedicated to the study of the works and creatures of God" with a vision of science and scientific pursuits that include reference to human

conditions, perforce subjective. The French Encyclopedist Diderot explained Bacon's genius by the fact that "when it was impossible to write a history of what men knew, he drew up the map of what they had to learn". Knowing how to deal with problems of ethics and social responsibility in science would have formed a part of that map. Solomon's House in New Atlantis was to serve the society in which it operated – and in the third millennium they would probably offer helpful courses on ethics in science in order better to achieve this goal. These studies should partly focus on the nature and functions of ethical standards to regulate scientific research and on the arguments for and against formulating them.

http://www.icsu.org/publications/reports-and-reviews/standards-responsibility-science/SCRES-Background.pdf

@ Richard J Naftalin ·-  Very rightly said Prof. Richard  "Ethical uses of scientific discovery is about more than individual decision making, it has to be a matter of establishing widely accepted public and societal norms and seeing to it that these are obeyed by everyone."  However, researchers should be attentive to the possibility that his discoveries, however ethically neutral or benign they may seem, can be perverted to antisocial ends. Individual scientists who recognize the importance of such actions must be prepared for long, frequently tedious educational and socio-political campaigns in societies that determinedly seek to avoid any social entanglements and to take what action he can, either alone or with a few like-minded colleagues, to ensure that the perversion of science does not go unchallenged. 

Dear All,

From my point of view, too much time has gone by in science education without the necessary frame on the social impact of science or on the ethical considerations that any human activity that can impact humankind should have. 

I would also say that this is not restricted to science, but also that in science, research and innovation is specilly important, due to the transformative power that they hold.

Dear Yogesh,

Dear All,

This question has already been asked several times. Generally, RG participants agreed that ethical education is necessary but its efficacy is very questionable and uncertain because ethical rules should be taught in the childhood and mainly in the family. Another trouble is, that ethical teaching is a very weak instrument if powerful and respected people’s ethical practice is controversial when they do not practise what they preach.

Andras

Yes. It is weak and misplaced. Ethics should be there from childhood and social education.

There is the tone that science and technology must be curbed if there is a possibility of perversion. How is an investigator to know?

Some contend that the atomic bomb was born when Einstein wrote E = mc2. It was not, but assume this were the case. Did Einstein intuit the bomb? If not, should he have? Was the only course to destroy his work?

Science is the seeking of truth. Is there a limit to seeking?

Seeking, experimenting, and applying led to the internal combustion engine. The automobile is a wonderful thing. It has some obvious drawbacks. Where should we have stopped to avoid the drawbacks? Is this an ethical question?

I agree that ethics should be there from childhood and family standards and it should be learn in each education grade from primary school to the doctorate level. But when it is related to business, profits, power, strategy, competition, politics, etc... how ethics is perceived?? Could scientific discoveries be free from competition, politics (geopolitics), bushiness, profits, power etc... interests?? should researchers and scientists be able to predict the evil usage of their discoveries and be able to auto-censure their findings, in that case how knowledge could evolves???

Dear Joseph,

I feel science and ethics should be compatible. If a scientific result is against elementary human ethics, it cannot be a value for humanity. This is how I, a humble entomologist imagine the transcendent paradigm should be.

Dear Fairouz,

If everyday life is dirty the principles of science should not be like that.

oh..yes

It goes without saying that the answer is positive. However - a big "but" - ethics should not be a separate subject. On the contrary, each single course should include ethical contents of their own. I truly distrust a specific course called "ethics" as if all the other courses did no have anything to do with that.

Starting with the basic school the notion of ethical and environmental safety (and his transversalities) is important. I believe we are in (I hope we're still) an accelerated growth of scientific progress. Some procedures, ethical, scientific, health and the environment has worked. My question is whether they work for the entire world society of large organizations that promote and leverage the scientific progress.

The damage of these organizations is quite large when discovered - Thalidomide, years ago. Rs. José Alberto Corrêa Leite

Lesson Plan - Produced by Earth Day Network in association with American Experience - SOCIAL, ETHICAL AND HUMAN ISSUES, where Students understand the ethical, cultural, and societal issues related to technology

Example:

Students consider two types of societies.

Society A is similar to what we envision long ago or in various parts of the world today – it uses simpler forms of technology and lacks many of the large-scale systems in place today, such as sanitation systems or the internet. A citizen wants a drink of water, s/he must walk to the closest freshwater source to fill their container with enough water to last until the next time s/he is able to walk the distance. This is a society where people do not have the same conveniences many people have today. They live closely with nature and have simpler tools.

Society B is quite different from the first, and more similar to the students’ own lives

–full of the many technological inventions and modern conveniences. If a citizen of this society desires a drink of water, s/he walks over to the faucet, turns it on, and clean water immediately flows out.

Students are asked to use their imagination or prior knowledge to fill out Reproducible –A Tale of  Two Societies Worksheet, considering the technology available to each person.

Oh yes dear Andras. Science principles are usually close to human development and knowledge evolution. Most of the true scientists work hard for the benefit of the human kind.They spend their lives, their intelligence and their works for human evolution, they couldn't make dirty things.Many of them when they feel that some misuse could happen from their work, auto-censure their selves automatically. The ethics is more close to  the benefit that others could catch from their works and how they could built personal or inner interests. Those pollute science with bad or false scientists as predators in service of some power to catch

I think this discussion is a little too bland.  "Ethics" "standards" "public good" "good" "evil" are all terms which have variable meaning in terms of societal norms.  For example: use of human embryonic tissue raises many ethical questions which may be interpreted by different societies in very polarized ways.  Some peoples may have no problems with using human embryonic tissue from aborted fetuses: whereas plenty of others do have deep concerns and are willing to arrest or even kill those who engage in such activities.  It is unlikely that we scientists will be able to harmonize these opposing belief systems which exist in different societies and within societies -even if  among ourselves, we are  in broader agreement than the general populations.  Since we are bound to work within the laws of the legal systems in which we as individuals live, we have a duty as informed citizens to voice our concerns within this wider context to try to ensure that the issues are discussed as dispassionately and rationally as is compatible with safety.  This is perhaps not much but the "trickle up" effect may make a difference if it is well directed.   

Watch and listen to this video

http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=8102f5ad7d2c77fd1c45ee47aae7bc84

the "inventor" of agent orange:: In the 1980s, Dr. Galston helped introduce popular courses in bioethics for undergraduates at Yale and in the 1990s was instrumental in founding the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at the university. 

In 2003, Dr. Galston reconsidered the arc of his research.

“You know,” he said, “nothing that you do in science is guaranteed to result in benefits for mankind. Any discovery, I believe, is morally neutral and it can be turned either to constructive ends or destructive ends.”

read this : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/us/23galston.html?_r=0

I agree dear @Brady, we do speak about life prepared citizens! Ethics issue is the main component, yes!

To gain a broader mindset and to realize the effect on the local community, discussing global awareness and the importance of scientific literacy and how it affects society

proved to be an important issue and teacher can address these ideas with students.

Virginia J. Moore et all (2014), Societal Issues in Social Studies and Science Education: Promoting Responsible Citizenship, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 4 , No. 10; August 2014. http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_10_August_2014/9.pdf

@ Richard – I thinks ethics (moral values) are different from social norms/standards/public good or evil which are seen to vary among different societies. There are certain universal principles irrespective of societies which are related to very existence of humanity and their violation could be devastating. It is therefore, ethical aspect is vital in use of science discoveries. Researchers must be on the alert to the possibility that his discoveries, however ethically neutral or benign they may seem, can be perverted to antisocial ends.

@Blazej – Any discovery is morally neutral and it can be turned either to constructive or destructive ends. Nothing that you do in science is guaranteed to result in benefits for mankind as rightly said by Dr. Galston. It is the reason why moral education including ethical and societal impact of science discoveries is necessary right from school stage so as to promote constructive thought among prospective researchers.

@ Brady Michael Jack – Indeed violation of ethics has severe risks in general and application of science discoveries in particular. Any invention in science is meant for the benefit and welfare of humanity. However, its abuse may convert these blessings into curse. As such risk involved in abuse/misuse of science inventions should be dealt in the process of decision-making. Indeed, such an approach would better prepare students to enter society as informed citizens.

 Ethics is already part of the (environmental) course. Take DDT for example, you can't avoid discussing the bad effects.

In modern science education ethical and social impact issues should be included. As it is going to help in the sustainable development process. After all, we should consider the survival of every species of the ecosystem along with the betterment of our standard of living.

Yes Dear Bhavesh. Ethics is a vital aspect in our professional lives as well as our personal business dealings. Educational institutions have not been exempt from ethical scandals in recent years. Thus, it is necessary for academic institution to inculcate a deeper understanding of the ethical implications in students, so that they can take ethical concerns seriously in their life and career.  A professional code of ethics for teachers is also critical as they are responsible for shaping the character of the next generation. 

At Indiana University Southeast, all science education and social studies major take a course "science, technology and society for a changing world which has an emphasis on the the ethics, and application of science in society.

Dear James, It is indeed delighting and encouraging that Indiana University Southeast, is addressing ethical and societal issues  in their science education and social studies curriculum.  

Ethics has been studied through different subjects in science study, at different levels of education. 

We had started with such efforts as the following article speaks about. "...students from various universities across Serbia come together in Belgrade for the Ethics Teachers Training Course (ETTC), designed by UNESCO’s Bioethics Programme to fulfill its mandate in ethics education. It empowers a young generation of teachers with pedagogic skills needed for successful teaching of ethics at various levels and faculties of higher education...."

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/bioethics/sv0/news/ethics_teachers_training_course_in_full_swing_in_serbia/#.VjINFNKrTIU

Yes, modern, contemporary education, including the new education 4.0 should include ethical issues and social problems. Ethics issues should be researched in the field of, for example, ethics of scientific research, ethics of solving social problems, ethics of data analysis obtained from the Internet and processed in the cloud on Big Data database platforms, business ethics, ethics of financial transactions in investment banking to reduce the risk of in the future of further financial crises, etc.

Definitely. A kodern scientist needs to be a role model not only in his field, but also in ethics and social responsibility.

Dear Yogesh Chandra Tripathi , your question becomes very relevant nowadays, in this hard Covid-19 times. We do need compassion for our students and for us more than ever...

Dear Yogesh Chandra Tripathi

The questioning is pertinent. Congratulations on sharing! In my opinion, yes. In addition, I think that ethics should be considered above all people's actions in life in society, including in everyday life. take care everyone. Cheers.

Happiness constitutes short moments of joy or pleasure. While satisfaction is a longer-term, and longer-lasting, emotion.

The UK higher education sector has turned towards happiness as a result of the pandemic and in the face of increased government and media pressure...

Aiming for short-term happiness could be our downfall. So what might we do to move back towards longer-term satisfaction rather than shorter-term happiness?

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/should-we-be-aiming-student-happiness-or-student-satisfaction?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial-daily&spMailingID=23107893&spUserID=MTAxNzcwNzE4MTk2NAS2&spJobID=2131205046&spReportId=MjEzMTIwNTA0NgS2