The principle of equality has been considered since a long time ago (at least in the more developed countries). However it looks still tolerated (if not supported) all over the world all kind of social disequilibrium (larger or smaller) and discrimination, whatever the state of the development of the countries. Is this principle established in the fundamental law of your country? What are the causes of some great inequalities observed and discriminations? What can be the possible solutions, and what should be the role of the researchers (if any)?
Academic and scientific community as the conscience of society should set standards and should be an example in the fight against social inequality and various forms of discrimination. External advice and societal engagement:Towards the 2016 and 2017 work programme of "Inclusive, Innovative and Reflective Societies" of Horizon 2020 is attached!
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/sites/horizon2020/files/External%20advice%20and%20societal%20engagement-SC6-2016-2017.pdf
The scientific community should focus more on social and other inequality issues in their research, including gender and financial inequalities which are particularly serious in developing countries. But while we can do research on such topics, its implementation is not in our hands. So, Governments and NGOs should come forward and play more active roles in implementing research recommendations for combating the social inequities and different sort of discrimination.
Big data analytics may be used to study this problem. See my recent queries for good links on big data analytics and use of big data software. It has applications in not only business but also for society in general.
The scientific community and researchers should play an important role in the social inequities and different sort of discriminations. This is one of the critical areas that researches should be focused on.
Researchers can draw the attention of community leaders and companies managers to fairness, anti-discrimination, and social equalities.
To help develop greater awareness of the individual as human being, regardless of race, gender and ethnicity!
Dear Antonio,
Dear All,
Scientists are brainworkers. We can flatter ourselves that we are able to see the raisons and the consequences. A brainworker should embrace even egoistically that a new and just world can be created for everybody and by the contribution of all the people. Consequently, a brainworker (except well paid mercenary scientists) is definitely for democracy and against discrimination.
How to do this? Each of us should serve this idea where s/he works and lives and each moment in his/her life.
Unfortunately, this is only the theory!
Generally the problem seems much more on the real world practice side than from the side of the production of laws (even if, for example, some medieval condemnations like a life sentence or the death penalty still exist in some places).
The researchers should find ways to implement the research findings on the real grounds, so that these social problems can be dealt with.
Science is fundamentally neutral to caste, creed, colour, and community; per se scientists invents, creates and solves problem for the entire humanity without any discrimination. Benefit of all these should reach to the last citizen of the world. I support the statement of Prof Kamal that all discerning and inhuman laws should be changed and restructured in turn with the basic human rights.
I thank all answers so far. Dear Roland: I agree with you, particularly about our role as researchers and academics (our responsibility is enormous).
Academic and scientific community as the conscience of society should set standards and should be an example in the fight against social inequality and various forms of discrimination. External advice and societal engagement:Towards the 2016 and 2017 work programme of "Inclusive, Innovative and Reflective Societies" of Horizon 2020 is attached!
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/sites/horizon2020/files/External%20advice%20and%20societal%20engagement-SC6-2016-2017.pdf
Social inequities and different sort of discrimination are also expressed in the science communities, or not (e.g. rich/large research teams versus poor/small research teams)?
The scientific community and researchers in the combat to the social inequities and different sort of discriminations can do three important contributions:
1. Identifying such inequities/discriminations and conducting research
2. Suggesting ways to reduce it
3. Communicating to the public even by using media
For details, see my study conducted in India and its results, through RG account.
Kundu, S.C.(2003). “Workforce Diversity Status: A Study of Employees’ Reactions,” Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 103, No. 4, pp. 215-226.
Available at www.emeraldinsight.com/imds.htm
Which science-based personality profiles have been selected by the peer reviewer science commissions: social or competitive people?
At least we should be involved in any discrimination in teaching and research. That is how the message will be conveyed in society and will flourish.
Dear Antonio
Your question is very interesting with good reason. Any scientific community has necessarily role in combating social inequality and the different forms of discrimination. Should first understand what discrimination. Certainly I belong to a country that is underdeveloped or emerging but there is no wage discrimination between women and men. But there are other forms of this discriminations.Par against wage discrimination exists in some developed countries. It is for this reason that we must pay attention to the concept of discrimination. I think every researcher or scientific community of each country can contribute depending on the mode of development of the country and its culture and religion
Best regards
How do you prove that you are part of them, you do what they do, you perform what they perform, you know what they know and you have similar vision for the future as they have but constantly doing and telling you do not belong to them or act in a manner saying you do not deserve what they deserve?
A contradiction of sameness and developed social evolution of we humans. I think learnt people of power should be intelligent enough to be out of such grouping mode of life and decisions and reasonable enough to be free to see the unknown or out of alike mentality. They have to be free from the dichotomy of we and them or revenge of a past event. Wrong acts and decisions how reasonable we may pretend are visible by their effects on rightful people and their lives not by the pretends we make.
Before the scientific community & researchers move to participate in rectifying the societal negativities, they ought to fight first the dishonesty within their rank & file. When the scholars are shining clean, then others will listen to them & may take them as examples to follow. A scholar was sitting next to a taxi driver who asked him “Are you a doctor in university so & so?”. He replied “Yes”. The driver said “Is it true that there is lot of cheating in your university & there are persons who occupied their posts on the basis of political affiliations only?”. The doctor was not able to deny anything said. Let us admit that injustice, inequality, and discrimination do exist in academic circles despite all the sweet words that are written in brochures or prospectuses.
Well, good point that you have done. I think that the scientific community and researchers should start a campaign to "fight" against that, because we try to solve problems, and discrimination is a social problem.
The academic/ scientific community must fight against all forms of inequality and discrimination of various kinds, racism, prejudice...! It is our role and our obligation for the sake of our society! Different ways of such struggle exist within society!
Dear all: In my opinion, as Professors (as many of us are), at least we should apply the laws, reject social inequities and do not take part in any game of interests. If all people follow our examples, there will be fewer injustices everywhere. The problem is that the bad examples (coming from egoistic people, some wrongly in the top level) are much easier and attractive to follow than the good examples (due to the weakness of the human being), and the results of this are the generalized reality that we all know. The current persons (good and bad) in the top level of public administration (in the politic parties and governments) and the current decision makers (good and bad) are the persons that were prepared in the universities several years before.
@Thomas: But then the scientists should give the example in their own work activities/science environment first, or not?
The reasons of inequalities and discriminations are not legal or constitucional at all. They have to do with the conciusness of politics and politicians. Equality is no their objetive but power, and power feeds itself on a kind of social desequilibrium that looks equilibrated, balanced or normal. What the scientific community should do?: constantly, it should show evidence of enequality in society, and, of course, present it as a disgrace and dishonor for such society.
Good meeting is going to be about: 12th Conference of the European Sociological Association, Differences, Inequalities and Sociological Imagination! It will be held in Prague, 25-28.08.2015 . Under the RN 24 group, Inequalities in and through science and technology as challenges for sociological researchwill be treated!
http://esa12thconference.eu/rn24-science-and-technology
Thank you for the excellent answer, Dear Luisa. The simpler thinking is frequently the wiser.
Dear Ljubomir: You are amazing. Thank you for bringing us the text (link) presenting the “12th Conference of the European Sociological Association” that will occur in August 2015 in Prague under the theme “Differences, Inequalities and Sociological Imagination”; “Inequalities in and through science and technology as challenges for sociological research” coordinated by Katarina Prpić.
Dear Antonio, the scientific community and researchers should be examples in their ethics and respect of standards to be able to be listen by common people. However in the combat of the social inequities and different sort of discrimination, i don't think that they could have a significant weigh in policies and decision making. Discrimination and social inequalities are the cause of political strategy and management methods (wrong, biased or chosen) by politicians and decision makers following private, groups or geopolitical interests. Social inequalities are not the cause of scientists.
Of course you are right (as usually), Dear Fairouz. In the practical point of view, this is a very complex issue. Let me complement the main question with an example. Einstein was a brilliant scientist but could not avoid two world wars during his life and the development of nuclear bombs (with the murdered in mass of many innocent people). In a higher plan, for what serves our knowledge, work and lives if we continue to ignore, contribute to, or even promote, the human misery and mediocrity that is the cause of such disgraces?
Dear friends,
has any of you ever seen "social inequities and different sort of discriminations" within the scientific community?
My University has become famous for the case "parentopoli".
Surprising results of a study on homonyms: in some universities is 10 times higher than average. To combat the problem are being blocked competitions and researchers protest: to pay are the sons of no one. Where there are more twists production quality is sub-standard.
Dear António,
Dear All,
Thinking people (professional brainworker) might have already recognised that approaching social equality may be an excellent tool for creating a better world. Thinking people should have the role of a lamp reflecting the way leading to this noble and useful aim.
Dear Hashem: Thanks for your answer. I also agree with Mahfuz good answer to this question. Dear all: Please see the link below (Paraisópolis, "Paradise city", is a Brazilian “Favela”):
http://www.hoklife.com/2010/09/14/all-men-are-created-equal-but-some-are-more-equal-than-others/
Dear Marwan: I am not sure if I understood your answer. We certainly agree that there are also many good people everywhere.
In answering the question of dear Professor Lerardi Enzo (has any of you ever seen "social inequities and different sort of discriminations" within the scientific community?). The answer is YES. In some universities, most of the administrative staff are from the city in which the university is located & these belong to a specific affiliation. As a cover-up, the game is played by grafting very few persons from outside the city & from outside that group but these grafted persons are really powerless.
You made a very clever question, Dear Enzo. Everyone can see. My answer is yes.
Socio-economic inequality refers to differences in a range of economic and social factors that influence well-being, including income, education, and health. Unequal societies experience higher rates of crime, ill-health drug abuse, and persistent poverty. Cohesion and growth objectives are therefore complementary as well as critical to socio-economic well being. Research and policy makers need far more explicit, and sustained, inquest and practice of thoughtful commitment to ensure that the benefits of science and technological advancement should reach to all without any discrimination.
Thank you dear Antonio for your kind thoughts. You are right, no scientist should promotes or contributes to the human misery and mediocrity (may be only a mad one). But how scientists could fight misery and mediocrity without real abilities of participation and influencing political planning,management and running. Only by words !... Is it a sufficient mean?? the good example of Einstein and how his work was wrongly or intentionally used by politics is there to learn us the weak ability of scientists to challenge politics and power ships interests. Lot of scientists 'mostly from under developed countries' suffer from misery and bad professional recognition. In under developed countries, scientists are not the rich; most of the rich and the more influencing people there, have very weak level of education and alphabetization!!
The words of Dr. Paul R. Yarnold are very precious. I saved them to read them many times. In academic circles, there is exactly what dear Dr. Paul said. I strongly believe in self-criticism before we criticize others. What has produced tyrants & parasites throughout history is the cowardice of the silent(!) majority. However, I learned very hard lessons & sacrificed a lot due to the absence of collective effort. You may say the truth about a despotic boss & point out his/her wrongdoing. Others will be convinced that you are right but they will tell the dictator (spying)in the hope of a "lift up" & will leave you alone suffering from the "grave" consequences of being "heretic" for criticizing the semi-God. I must re-iterate that before we move to rectify the society, we have to carry out an overall clean-up within our academic rank & file.
I just read many answers on this thread. How can we solve the problems in this situation? What are your practical ideas? (Some of us are caught in similar inequities.)
'The 1979 revolution that deposed the Iranian Shah led to a significant decline in women’s rights. The revolution itself came about as a reaction to the economic havoc of Westernization and globalization, which impacted all but the most affluent members of Iranian society. Even though women played a major role in the success of the revolution, under the new rule of the fundamentalist Islamists, they lost many rights that they once held in the previous regime. Women now face striking inequalities in many aspects of life.'
'Education is another area in which women face more challenges than men. This is especially true in regards to university education. In the past, gender neutral national tests meant that more women were admitted into universities. But gender quotas and segregation have since reduced their numbers. In 2011, the percent of admitted female students fell from 60 percent to 48.7 percent from the previous year. Another disparity came to light when 36 universities in the country forbade women from enrolling in 77 subjects. Even after attending college, long seen as a step-up in society, women still experience unequal access to jobs.' (Please read the rest. After more than a year were the shackles released? What ideas can our RG community come up with? Thanks.)
http://prospectjournal.org/2013/09/09/releasing-the-shackles-of-iranian-women/
The scientific community as the conscience of society? This may be presuming too much. When scientists get too cocksure of their success in the lab and start dictating social norms, then they fail as scientists even if they succeed as politicians. I find science and politics unfortunately at odds. Let scientists rule their labs, while politicians experiment on their States. There is a time and a place for science and a time and place for politics. Never should the two meet. When Einstein made a ridiculous statement about the Spanish Civil War, he was severely reprimanded by Spaniards. When Einstein refused the presidency of the State of Israel, he obviously felt he was more useful in the laboratory instead.
Dear Paul,
In support your statements who to believe, I express the strange things I see, the untruthfulness of learnt people in positions to hire or employ a person and do the right things. In science and mathematics we apply principles of science, logic and reason to find the truth of things and apply. Our life is always to search truth but when it comes to such social matters, most people behave differently, they not only prefer but boldly act on favoritism and likeness. They display an act like giving a hand to a person they prefer in a group of people who are hanging on a cliff who need some one to rescue them.
For instance I will pick a person who is more qualified and with more accomplishments to a faculty position in a particular field than otherwise. I will hire a person who is looking for an employment, sending his/her applications for several years living in my neighborhood with full training and expertise at any cost, who needs a very negligible part of the finances we have. My very training, conscience and the virtue of doing the right things dictate me to do that.
Addressing inequalities and discrimination is in everyone’s best interest per se responsibility of all as growing disparity has negative economic, social and political consequences. Depriving people or community from access to economic resources and employment, health, adequate food, clean water and sanitation, education, skills and technology based on their race, ethnicity, geographical territory, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. will result in a reduction of future productive human potential. There is no place for any kind of discrimination in science and scientific endeavours. It is responsibility of policymakers, administrators, managers to look into it with utmost sincerity and honesty so that fruits of scientific and technological advancement to reach to all equitably without any discrimination.
Dear Paul: I agree with many of your considerations, and in particular that this does not seem a problem of specific professions or professional classes. Fortunately, the glass of water is not totally empty. The main difficulty is what we can do in practice to eradicate or change some wrong current trends.
Dear all: See the following link, with a Bob Dylan song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l4nVByCL44
Social hierarchy exist in the world societies and difference occur in the context of historical and contemporary social inequalities influenced by a variety of reasons like conscious/unconscious stereotyping, racial/ethnic differences, economic status, etc. Contemporary world where we live today is shaped by science and technology. Intrinsic nature of science is universal so, there must be efficient systems for equitable sharing of the opportunity and benefit rendered by S&T. The outcome and benefits of scientific developments should rich each and every section of the society and individual without any discrimination. Furthermore, success of scientific ventures depends on co-operation, interaction and exchange, often beyond national boundaries. The right and freedom of scientists to associate in international scientific activity irrespective of their citizenship, religion, creed, political stance, ethnic origin, race, colour, language, age or sex should be ascertained.
Yes, dear Roland, without total and correct information and full application of the fundamental laws, there is no true democracy in the societies. Fortunately we do not live in the dark ages, and the principles subjacent to the basic laws are not Machiavellian. Minorities should be always respected, and the illnesses that are affecting the societies corrected (as much as possible).
Thanks again for your answers, dear Roland. With respect to the Quotes of William J. Clinton, B. R. Ambedkar, Carl T. Rowan, and Carol Bellamy, I agree that references should never be forgotten (particularly suitable):
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/williamjc453684.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/brambedk396159.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/carltrowa105885.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/carolbella296351.html
Researchers have specific obligations towards society in different ways. Avoidance of any kind of inequities and discriminations on any ground should be the moral verdict of all involved in R&D. Objectively should the major virtue in pursuit of science and all scientific research and technological innovations should be conducted, presented, and disseminated quite indiscriminately.
Thanks Yogesh for another perspective of this issue. I agree that our scientific research should be disseminated without discriminations through all scientific and academic community (allowing that it can be used and cited more frequently, and RG seems a good place for that).
Following thread discussing gender bias in science:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/
In fact today’s science student will become scientist/researcher tomorrow. Implementation of educational programs right from school stage in order to ensure their knowledge, skills, and professional practices reflect understanding and respect for human diversity and promote effective services, advocacy, and social justice for all without any kind of discrimination.
Thanks for the link, dear Yogesh. I suppose that the discrimination due to the gender does not seem very frequent currently in the European University context (fortunately), but I do not know how it is in the Universities at a global scale. The preference for female gender may even be possible (?) due to familiar interest contexts (wrongly) in a context similar to that mentioned by Enzo in page 5? All the laws, and particularly the laws of equality, should be always correctly and integrally applied.
I agree with Roland. In my perspective to err is human, but not learning is not.
What happened with RG account of Paul? His name is deleted in his answers. I read in another discussion that Irina intend to leave RG. Please Irina does not leave.
Dear @Antonio, dear @Irina has left RG community! Paul left Research Gate as @Kamal did it before. His answers are present, but papers are not. I do not know the reason, but I am aware of Irina's reason.
Já tinha reparado que me faltava mais um amigo... Não é possível !!!! ???!!!!
Please forgive me, I was so nervous, thast I forgot in which lkanguage I was speaking... C'est pas possible ! I will miss him dearly. (It's an injustice. It is...)
Rondel de l'adieu
Partir, c'est mourir un peu,
C'est mourir à ce qu'on aime :
On laisse un peu de soi-même
En toute heure et dans tout lieu.
C'est toujours le deuil d'un vœu,
Le dernier vers d'un poème ;
Partir, c'est mourir un peu.
Et l'on part, et c'est un jeu,
Et jusqu'à l'adieu suprême
C'est son âme que l'on sème,
Que l'on sème à chaque adieu...
Partir, c'est mourir un peu.
Edmond Haraucourt
Correction! Good news my dear fellows. Dear sister @Irina is here, she will not leave our community! Nice!
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Irina_Pechonkina
Sim Maria. … O esquecimento parece incrível. … Errar é humano? Mas a sua rectificação não parecerá divina?Portuguese can be easily understood, particularly between researchers …, I suppose. I cannot understand why the account of our true friend Paul seems deleted in RG. I let here the Francis of Assisi quote that he cited to us: “For it is in giving that we receive.”
Thanks for the links, Dear Sergei. … I am not an expert in RG. … Paul R. Yarnold will have always my friendship independently of the address used. Remembering his thinking, greed may be the basis of the (social) injustices.
Scientific researchers are leading force of society . They should play an active role in the elimination of social inequality. Educational work carried out in the first place. I should note that it is not possible to fully eliminate social inequality.
Yes Dear Shafagat, world's scientific community being leading force of society should play an active role in the elimination of social inequality. However social, political and educational institutions should also support.
Sometimes it is good when there is a synergy of political will and action with the scientific community acting. But, very often politics makes an obstacle to the goal!
I agree with Ljubomir. Societies are composed by individuals. Individuals should be ruled by common universal values, and not merely by its interests or the interests of particular groups. I can see these universal values in all spectrums of the politic parties in my country, for example. So why just do not execute them in practice. In Portugal, we have a much known expression for what may happen sometimes when some politic parties occupy the power: “Jobs for the boys”. But this bad example can be extended to many organizations and common procedures (still accepted)? I also agree with Shafagat Mahmudova: The focus must be given on education, whether called civic education or moral (and religious?) education. School cannot substitute the progenitors in the education and teaching of the basic principles of their children, but can/must give a fundamental support. The men and women of tomorrow are the children of today.
Dear Antonio:
The reasons why inequality persists --among individuals and groups within countries and among countries-- are so complex that I will focus on two specific points. .
On the one hand, equality as a value --as a desirable goal-- is frequently below other values or priorities. Sometimes economic growth is priority. In the long term, sustained growth will produce equality, but in the meantime it often produces large inequalities. In many cases, people with unsatisfied basic needs lack the means --and perhaps sufficient awareness-- to demand more than the coverage of these minimum requirements. Many people seem to see freedom and equality as opposites that require a trade-off: They 'prefer' to have 'more freedom' , even if it means 'some inequality'. Public opinion often works with this type of reasoning and this has implications for public policy.
On the other hand, not everyone understand 'equality' in the same way. For example, some people think that to achieve 'economic equality' an authoritarian regime is needed, that is, we need to limit 'political equality'. For a long time, gender rights, or the rights of cultural minorities, were seen as superfluous or even harmful in order to achieve a unified society in search of 'social equality'.
Dear all, freedom and equality are precious values, to be attained by love.
But differences must be accepted as well, as men are different from Body, mind and Soul. This leads to diverse live experiences forming different characters.
Still the aim should be as many different forms of equality as possible in order to lead us to a better development.
The scientific community could try to establish a better understanding of differences without evaluating them, without judging them like some religions and politicians are doing: These are the bad and These are the good ones. Understanding differences means not neglecting them, see where are the Limits and borders and look for means how to live with them in more and more equality connecting sciences with our positive developments from Body, mind and Soul and Environment. Could it be that way?
Thanks Dear Thomas for your valuable answer. Please allow me to post a link below to your excellent RG question about “Values” whose disrespect may be also the cause for several sort of social injustices and enormous social disequilibrium in many places.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/There_is_a_big_confusion_about_values_going_on_even_on_a_more_globalizing_scale_How_about_this_in_your_personal_and_scientific_scale_and_experience
Thanks a lot António: connecting and viewing from different Corners will make an important part of the future Approach to the questions trying to lead into new directions. All the best for 2016 to all !!!
Surely that you are right, Dear Renzo. However science is developed by humans and for humans, and not for the beasts. Beasts cannot produce science. If persons are permanently in war, persons have not time for developing anything that worth. Also if by absurd the results of the science can be used for the humankind destruction, it’s just because human values were not being followed as they should.
I would prefer thinking about the huge scientific advance that could have happened if Cold War had never existed. Also the Cold War was “very warm” in many places of the world, and it produced many human victims between innocent people, particularly in Africa and South America, perhaps not so much in France, URSS, or USA. Cold War was a big shame for the humankind. In my opinion, any war (cold or hot) is stupid by nature and has nothing to with scientific development. Historically, there are wrong ideas of development.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education