Talk:Hippocratic Oath for scientists: Difference between revisions
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Replaced obsolete tt tags and reduced Lint errors. (Task 12) |
→Copyrighted text: addition TBC, hopably in the next 18 hrs. |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
The text is no longer predominantly copied from another page [[User:Tachyon502|Tachyon502]] ([[User talk:Tachyon502|talk]]) 22:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC) |
The text is no longer predominantly copied from another page [[User:Tachyon502|Tachyon502]] ([[User talk:Tachyon502|talk]]) 22:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC) |
||
—- |
|||
Would it be interesting to link from here to the "Engineer's Creed"? Either http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ritual_of_the_Calling_of_an_Engineer, and/or http://www.engineering.ualberta.ca/news.cfm?story=58202. [[User:BeckyAnderson|BeckyAn]] ([[User talk:BeckyAnderson|talk]]) 04:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC) |
Would it be interesting to link from here to the "Engineer's Creed"? Either http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ritual_of_the_Calling_of_an_Engineer, and/or http://www.engineering.ualberta.ca/news.cfm?story=58202. [[User:BeckyAnderson|BeckyAn]] ([[User talk:BeckyAnderson|talk]]) 04:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
::Perhaps a better link would be here: http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html however all/most Professions have codes of ethics that are enforced through their Professional bodies and the rulings of which affect the membership necessary to practice. [[User:LookingGlass|LookingGlass]] ([[User talk:LookingGlass|talk]]) 08:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC) |
::Perhaps a better link would be here: http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html however all/most Professions have codes of ethics that are enforced through their Professional bodies and the rulings of which affect the membership necessary to practice. [[User:LookingGlass|LookingGlass]] ([[User talk:LookingGlass|talk]]) 08:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC) |
||
::: Link Schmink. IMNSHO, the “professions” differ distinctly from the equally honorable “trades” in (at least) one crucial way: every pr’n or trade has principles that are breached only at the members deep peril. One frequently relevant distinction is a ‘’need’’ for deep clarity (not about precise details, but about hard-to-nail-down judgments that true professionals have to not simply follow, but to “cleave to”). The professions refine … ‘’’push’’’ the precision of … of ethical judgments further than the trades for two reasons: 1. The stakes ‘’tend’’ to be greater. 2. The technical judgments that are meaningfully feasible are (often) more precise, and more formally stated. (WiP/TbC’d) — <i>ex-Jerzy, -JerzyA, etc.; addition TBC, hopably in the next 18 hrs.</i> |
|||
== Hypocrisy? == |
== Hypocrisy? == |
||
Revision as of 13:00, 16 March 2022
Copyrighted text
The CorenSearchBot correctly notes that much of the text of this article is copied from another web page:
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2007/09/hippocratic_oath_for_scientist.html
As the text is the seven principles of a code to be adopted by all scientists worldwide, it is logical to assume that this text will not have any copyright.
– confirmed. — madman bum and angel 18:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
The text is no longer predominantly copied from another page Tachyon502 (talk) 22:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
—-
Would it be interesting to link from here to the "Engineer's Creed"? Either http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ritual_of_the_Calling_of_an_Engineer, and/or http://www.engineering.ualberta.ca/news.cfm?story=58202. BeckyAn (talk) 04:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
or to here: http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/index.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.128.198.190 (talk) 17:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps a better link would be here: http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html however all/most Professions have codes of ethics that are enforced through their Professional bodies and the rulings of which affect the membership necessary to practice. LookingGlass (talk) 08:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Link Schmink. IMNSHO, the “professions” differ distinctly from the equally honorable “trades” in (at least) one crucial way: every pr’n or trade has principles that are breached only at the members deep peril. One frequently relevant distinction is a ‘’need’’ for deep clarity (not about precise details, but about hard-to-nail-down judgments that true professionals have to not simply follow, but to “cleave to”). The professions refine … ‘’’push’’’ the precision of … of ethical judgments further than the trades for two reasons: 1. The stakes ‘’tend’’ to be greater. 2. The technical judgments that are meaningfully feasible are (often) more precise, and more formally stated. (WiP/TbC’d) — ex-Jerzy, -JerzyA, etc.; addition TBC, hopably in the next 18 hrs.
- Perhaps a better link would be here: http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html however all/most Professions have codes of ethics that are enforced through their Professional bodies and the rulings of which affect the membership necessary to practice. LookingGlass (talk) 08:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hypocrisy?
Is there a way to expand this article so as to outline the "issues" that "scientists" see as setting them apart from those other members of society similarly empowered (the other Professions), and thereby, in some quasi-mystical manner, to elevate them above any enforceable requirement for ethical conduct? The deification of science achieved by virtue of being "understood" as being concerned only with the pursuit of "truth" is one. If it is the only one then it could have it's own section. The obvious "problem" is that doing so might foster some debate, but simply outlining the main reasoning for and against ethical conduct in science should be simple enought to summarise. LookingGlass (talk) 08:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)