I have Dr Martin Smith of the School of Chemistry at the University of St. Andrews to thank for drawing my attention to this comment in an editorial in Chemistry World, the journal of the Royal Society of Chemistry:
Regulation has its place, but it is not a proxy for ethics. As a means of guiding fast-moving developments in science and technology, ethics — operating at the level of individuals, in real time — is much more relevant.
As Martin said to me:
Swap out sci & tech for finance, audit etc and ... in his editorial, deputy editor Philip Robinson ... absolutely nailed so much of what underlies a great deal of your blog in a single, short sharp sentence.
I agree. But then in the world of finance we suffer fools who deem that the world is governed by rules that are created for them to abuse. Maybe that exists in chemistry as well, or the discussion would not be needed there either. But I am glad to see that ethical common sense is a common language of real progress.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
In science, the penalty for unethical behaviour (such as lying) is severe – it is usually career ending – so at the individual level scientists are highly motivated to be ethical.
In my view, the penalty for lying in politics or other spheres (such as finance) should be similarly high.
If only….
Politicians lying….?
I say I say i say…How do you know if a politician is lyin’?
Aiy don’t know…How DO you tell if a politician is lyin’ ?
Look to see if his lips are moving.
Aiy don’t wish to know that. Kaindly leave the stage.