Editing Social responsibility (section)

==Individual social responsibility==

One can be socially responsible passively, by avoiding engaging in socially harmful acts, or actively, by performing activities that advance social goals. Social responsibility has an intergenerational aspect, since the actions of one generation have consequences for their posterity, and also can be more or less respectful for their ancestors.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Invernizzi|first1=Diletta Colette|last2=Locatelli|first2=Giorgio|last3=Brookes|first3=Naomi J.|date=2017-10-01|title=Managing social challenges in the nuclear decommissioning industry: A responsible approach towards better performance|journal=International Journal of Project Management|series=Social Responsibilities for the Management of Megaprojects|volume=35|issue=7|pages=1350–1364|doi=10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.12.002|url=https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/110232/1/To%20deposit.pdf|access-date=2023-08-30|archive-date=2023-06-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230617130658/https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/110232/1/To%20deposit.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

Social responsibility can require a degree of boldness or [[courage]]. [[Alexander Solzhenitsyn]], for example, believed that "we have gotten used to regarding as valor only valor in war (or the kind that's needed for flying in outer space), the kind which jingle-jangles with medals. We have forgotten another concept of ''valor—civil valor''. And that's all our society needs, just that, just that, just that!".<ref>{{cite book|first=Alexander|last=Solzhenitsyn|title=The Gulag Archipelago, 1918–1956|volume=1: An Experiment in Literary Investigation|year=1973}}</ref>

Another way to be socially responsible is by being careful not to spread information that you have not diligently vetted for its truth. In the modern information environment, "the stakes of credulity are simply too high," says Francisco Mejia Uribe. Socially responsible people have "the moral obligation to believe only what we have diligently investigated." And a socially responsible person "in her capacity as communicator of belief… has the moral responsibility not to pollute the well of collective knowledge and instead to strive to sustain its integrity."<ref>{{cite journal|first=Francisco|last=Mejia Uribe|title=To be a responsible citizen today, it is not enough to be reasonable|journal=[[Psyche (magazine)|Psyche]] |date=12 January 2021|url=https://psyche.co/ideas/to-be-a-responsible-citizen-today-it-is-not-enough-to-be-reasonable|access-date=30 August 2023|archive-date=30 August 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230830194752/https://psyche.co/ideas/to-be-a-responsible-citizen-today-it-is-not-enough-to-be-reasonable|url-status=live}}</ref>

===Scientists and engineers===
[[File:Wolfgang Ischinger mit Roboter Sophia MSC 2018.jpg|thumb|The social responsibility of scientists and engineers can influence how robots are programmed.]]
Are scientists and engineers morally responsible for the negative consequences that result from applications of their knowledge and inventions?<ref name="auto">{{multiref2
|1={{cite book|last1=Huesemann|first1=Michael H.|first2=Joyce A.|last2=Huesemann|year=2011|url=https://www.newtechnologyandsociety.org/|url-access=subscription|title=Technofix: Why Technology Won't Save Us or the Environment|chapter=Critical Science and Social Responsibility|publisher=New Society Publishers|location=Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada|isbn=978-0865717046|access-date=2023-08-30|archive-date=2023-08-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230830154436/https://www.newtechnologyandsociety.org/|url-status=live}}
|2={{cite journal | last1 = Barnaby | first1 = W. | year = 2000 | title = Science, technology, and social responsibility | journal = Interdisciplinary Science Reviews | volume = 25 | issue = 1| pages = 20–23 | doi = 10.1179/isr.2000.25.1.20 | s2cid = 144627671 }}
|3={{cite journal | last1 = Edsall | first1 = J.T. | year = 1975 | title = Scientific freedom and responsibility | journal = Science | volume = 188 | issue = 4189| pages = 687–693 | doi = 10.1126/science.11643270 | pmid = 11643270 | bibcode = 1975Sci...188..687E }}
|4={{cite journal | last1 = Edsall | first1 = J.T. | year = 1981 | title = Two aspects of scientific responsibility | journal = Science | volume = 212 | issue = 4490| pages = 11–14 | doi = 10.1126/science.7209513 | pmid = 7209513 | bibcode = 1981Sci...212...11E }}
|5={{cite book|last=Forge|first=J.|year=2008|title=The Responsible Scientist|publisher=University of Pittsburgh Press}}
}}</ref> If scientists and engineers take pride in the positive achievements of science and technology, shouldn't they also accept responsibility for the negative consequences related to the use or abuse of scientific knowledge and technological innovations?<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Ziman | first1 = J. | year = 1971 | title = Social responsibility (I) – The impact of social responsibility on science | journal = Impact of Science on Society | volume = 21 | issue = 2| pages = 113–122 }}</ref> Scientists and engineers have a collective responsibility to examine the values embedded in the research problems they choose and the ethics of how they share their findings with the public.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Resnik|first1=D. B.|last2=Elliott|first2=K. C.|year=2016|title=The ethical challenges of socially responsible science|journal=Accountability in Research|volume=23|number=1|pages=31–46|doi=10.1080/08989621.2014.1002608|pmid=26193168 |pmc=4631672 }}</ref>{{editorializing|date=August 2023}}

Committees of scientists and engineers are often involved in planning governmental and corporate research programs, including those devoted to the development of military technologies and weaponry.<ref name=Collins>{{cite journal | last1 = Collins | first1 = F. | year = 1972 | title = Social ethics and the conduct of science – Specialization and the fragmentation of responsibility | journal = Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences | volume = 196 | issue = 4| pages = 213–222 | doi = 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1972.tb21230.x | pmid = 4504112 | bibcode = 1972NYASA.196..213C | s2cid = 38345454 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Leitenberg | first1 = M. | year = 1971 | title = Social responsibility (II) – The classical scientific ethic and strategic-weapons development | journal = Impact of Science on Society | volume = 21 | issue = 2| pages = 123–136}}</ref> Many professional societies and national organizations, such as the [[National Academy of Sciences]] and the [[National Academy of Engineering]] in the United States, have ethical guidelines (see [[Engineering ethics]] and [[Research ethics]] for the conduct of scientific research and engineering).<ref>{{cite book|url=https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/12192/on-being-a-scientist-a-guide-to-responsible-conduct-in|title=On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research|publisher=The National Academies Press|edition=Third|isbn=9780309119702|year=2009|doi=10.17226/12192|pmid=25009901|access-date=2023-08-30|archive-date=2023-08-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230830154438/https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/12192/on-being-a-scientist-a-guide-to-responsible-conduct-in|url-status=live}}</ref> Scientists and engineers, individually and collectively, have a special and greater responsibility than average citizens with respect to the generation and use of scientific knowledge.

Some argue that because of the complexity of social responsibility in research, scientists and engineers should not be blamed for all the evils created by new scientific knowledge and technological innovations.<ref name="auto" /> First, there is fragmentation and diffusion of responsibility: Because of the intellectual and physical division of labor, the resulting fragmentation of knowledge, the high degree of specialization, and the complex and hierarchical decision-making process within corporations and government research laboratories, it is exceedingly difficult for individual scientists and engineers to control the applications of their innovations.{{r|Collins}} This fragmentation of work and decision-making results in fragmented moral accountability, often to the point where "everybody involved was responsible but none could be held responsible."<ref>{{cite book|last=Lowrance|first=W.W.|year=1985|title=Modern science and human values|publisher=Oxford University Press|page=75}}</ref>

Another problem is ignorance. The scientists and engineers cannot predict how their newly generated knowledge and technological innovations may be abused or misused. The excuse of ignorance is stronger for scientists involved in very basic and fundamental research where potential applications cannot be even envisioned, than for scientists and engineers involved in applied scientific research and technological innovation since in such work objectives are well-known. For example, most corporations conduct research on specific products or services that promise to yield profit for share-holders. Similarly, most of the research funded by governments is mission-oriented, such as protecting the environment, developing new drugs, or designing more lethal weapons. In cases where the application of scientific knowledge and technological innovation is well-known ''a priori'', a scientist or engineer cannot escape responsibility for research and technological innovation that is morally dubious.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ravetz|first=J.R.|year=1996|title=Scientific knowledge and its social problems|location=New Brunswick, N.J.|publisher=Transaction Publishers|page=415}}</ref> As John Forge writes in ''Moral Responsibility and the Ignorant Scientist'': "Ignorance is not an excuse precisely because scientists can be blamed for being ignorant."<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Forge | first1 = J | year = 2000 | title = Moral responsibility and the ignorant scientist | journal = Science and Engineering Ethics | volume = 6 | issue = 3| pages = 341–349 | doi = 10.1007/s11948-000-0036-9 | pmid = 11273459 | s2cid = 40073027 }}</ref>

Another point of view is that responsibility falls on those who provide the funding for the research and technological developments (in most cases corporations and government agencies). Because taxpayers provide the funds for government-sponsored research, they and the politicians that represent them should perhaps be held accountable for the uses and abuses of science.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Beckwith | first1 = J. | last2 = Huang | first2 = F. | year = 2005 | title = Should we make a fuss? A case for social | journal = Nature Biotechnology | volume = 23 | issue = 12| pages = 1479–1480 | doi = 10.1038/nbt1205-1479 | pmid = 16333283 | s2cid = 20366847 }}</ref> In times past scientists could often conduct research independently, but today's experimental research requires expensive laboratories and instrumentation, making scientists dependent on those who pay for their studies.

Quasi-legal instruments, or [[soft law]], has received some normative status in relation to private and public corporations in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ([[UNESCO]]) ''Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights'' developed by the UNESCO [[International Bioethics Committee]] particularly in relation to child and maternal welfare.{{clarify|reason=confusing run-on sentence|date=March 2022}}<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Faucet|first1=T.A.|last2=Nasu|first2=H.|title=Normative Foundations of Technology Transfer and Transnational Benefit Principles in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights|journal=Journal of Medicine and Philosophy|pages=1–26|year=2009|volume=34 |issue=3 |doi=10.1093/jmp/jhp021 |pmid=19395367 |url=http://law.anu.edu.au/StaffUploads/236-Art%20JMedPhilosUS09.pdf |access-date=2009-06-18 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611164106/http://law.anu.edu.au/StaffUploads/236-Art%20JMedPhilosUS09.pdf |archive-date=2011-06-11}}</ref>{{rp|7}} The [[International Organization for Standardization]] will "encourage voluntary commitment to social responsibility and will lead to common guidance on concepts, definitions and methods of evaluation."<ref>{{cite ISO standard|csnumber=26000|title=ISO 26000: Social responsibility|year=2009|page=8|url=https://www.iso.org/iso-26000-social-responsibility.html}}</ref>