My Online Professional Ethics Seminar

[Dante]

So my graduate school, upon urging by the Federal Government I believe, is requiring us to read and take quizzes on these overviews of various topics in the ethics of being a social science researcher. The particular one I'm on right now is on mentors and trainees, and it just strikes me in reading it how much better the article might be if it were speaking the language of value and self-interest, rather than duty, responsibility, and obligation. Here's an example of what I mean:

Just as trainees in science have a responsibility to seek mentors, scientists have a complementary responsibility to become mentors. Taking an active role in helping to train the next generation should be part of the definition of a scientist. For this reason, the enterprise of science depends on effective communication not only with regard to scientific concepts and principles, but also about the practice of science, standards of conduct, and ethical and social responsibility. This obligation extends to all members of the community, not just senior researchers. For example, a newly arrived undergraduate student surely benefits from the mentoring of a graduate student, technician, or even a more senior undergraduate.

First and foremost, the concepts stressed are duty, responsibility, obligation, simply because this is what is expected of scientists. Now, in a later section of the article it does attempt to describe the benefits of being a mentor, but there seems to be little connection drawn between the immense potential benefits of the process and one's obligation to do it, and the supposed moral impetus is obviously based on the obligation part.

In my view, there is a wonderful case to be made for the immense potential benefits of entering into a mentor-trainee relationship. The dissemination of scientific knowledge and the furtherance of the scientific profession are obviously going to be immense values for anyone who has chosen a career in science, and these are the same values which form the basis for many of the benefits of the mentor relationship. Additionally, the potential deep and personal connection between mentor and trainee is an obvious and valuable outcome of the process. Now, certainly the article touches on all of this, but the benefits are built into a case which rests fundamentally on obligation, rather than chosen values. Hence, the article is not so much convincing as admonishing. It's little wonder that formal "professional ethics" programs like this one are often viewed with some derision.

Anyways, this just occurred to me as I was reading, and I thought I'd share (and procrastinate a bit ). Articles like this should be written solely in the language of value, rather than have that stuff tacked on to the end of a lecture on duty.

[softwareNerd]

Articles like this should be written solely in the language of value, rather than have that stuff tacked on to the end of a lecture on duty.

Agreed 100%. it would be nice if all motivation were value-oriented.

The whole "its your responsibility" thing is pretty incoherent really. In Objectivist terms, it is "rationalistic", with no link to reality. In contrast, when someone starts to speak about benefits, the reader can relate that to reality and see how they apply to him.