In this blog post, we will examine the ethical responsibilities required of scientists and engineers based on discussions about the value neutrality of science and technology.
With an internet connection, you can buy stuff from a shopping mall on the other side of the world, and you can fly anywhere in half a day. We’re enjoying tech that was unimaginable just 100 years ago, and science and tech will become even more a part of our lives in the future. But as science and tech become more a part of our lives, the side effects of tech become more serious. Personal information leaks via the Internet are commonplace, and Internet addiction due to excessive Internet use is a serious social problem. In addition, greenhouse gases emitted by transportation such as airplanes cause global warming and threaten the environment. Although the primary cause of these damages lies with the users of technology, scientists and engineers can also be held responsible in that their technological developments were the starting point of the damages. In this situation, should scientists and engineers be responsible for the problems caused by the technologies they develop? If so, what stance should scientists and engineers take toward future technological development, and what kind of social systems should be put in place to support them?
To answer these questions, we must first discuss the value neutrality of technology. The value neutrality of technology has two main meanings. One is philosophical, and the other concerns the interaction between society and science and technology. From a philosophical perspective, those who argue for value neutrality claim that technology is a discipline that deals with facts, like science, and is therefore unrelated to our subjective value judgments. This argument is clearly false when we consider the dictionary definition of technology. Technology is defined as “the process of applying scientific theory to make natural objects useful in human life.” In other words, technology is not simply knowledge, but a concept that includes the process of its application, so value judgments inevitably come into play when determining whether the effects of technology are useful in human life. Therefore, in a philosophical sense, technology is not value-neutral.
Second, there is a view that science and technology are value-neutral because they do not have any social ideology or political nature. From this perspective, ethical issues such as the misuse of technology are the responsibility of the society or politicians who utilize that technology, and scientists and engineers should focus only on developing technology. However, scientists and engineers inevitably receive economic and political influences in the process of developing technology, and these influences are directly reflected in science and technology. Let’s consider the economic impact. In the age of capitalism, scientists and engineers are inevitably influenced, directly or indirectly, by capital, or capitalists. The development of technology inevitably incurs costs, and in order to cover these costs, scientists and engineers develop technology in the direction desired by capital. Furthermore, as science has advanced, the costs of developing science and technology have increased, and dependence on capital has naturally become greater. Therefore, science and technology are developed for specific groups or purposes under the yoke of capital. In the development of new drugs, the fact that more research is being conducted on relatively less fatal diseases in developed countries than on endemic diseases that claim countless lives in developing countries clearly shows the dependence of technology on capital. Now let’s consider the political influence. In the 20th century, humanity experienced a knowledge revolution, which led to technological innovation. As a result, technology itself became a source of national and social competitiveness, and human society became a “knowledge-based society” in which scientific knowledge creates value and advances society. Therefore, many countries have adopted policies that instruct scientists and engineers to develop specific technologies, and in the process, political objectives have become involved in technology. This explains why nuclear fission and space exploration technologies developed so much faster than other technologies in the past. Therefore, it is difficult to view science and technology as devoid of ideology and politics, and it is also impossible to establish their value neutrality.
So far, we have examined two meanings of the value neutrality of science and technology and concluded that technology is not value neutral in either sense. If it is clear that technology is not independent from society but influences and is influenced by it, then the social responsibility of scientists and engineers who create technology should be emphasized in today’s technology-dominated society. So what responsibilities do scientists and engineers have? Their most fundamental responsibility is to improve the quality of human life through technology. However, since technology is designed to improve the quality of human life in some way, scientists and engineers must focus more on situations in which their technology may unintentionally harm humans. The reason why technology created to be useful for human life paradoxically impairs the quality of human life is because technology can be linked to various ethical issues. For example, biotechnology that utilizes human genetic information and embryonic stem cells has become controversial due to its direct connection to bioethics, and the development of the Internet has raised ethical issues regarding personal information leaks and copyright. In order to resolve these issues, the efforts of individual scientists and engineers must be prioritized. Therefore, it is necessary to thoroughly examine the process through which the problems caused by technology in the past arose, and based on this, it is necessary to make it a habit to consider the ethical issues that the technology currently being developed may cause. In addition, in order to maintain objectivity, a culture of discussion on ethical issues among researchers in the same field should be promoted.
However, there are various difficulties in individual scientists and engineers feeling and practicing such ethical responsibility. First, modern science and technology are developed through the cooperation of scientists and engineers in various fields. For example, it is no exaggeration to say that large-scale research projects such as the particle accelerator development project, which was an important stepping stone for the discovery of the Higgs particle, were made possible by the combined efforts of scientists and engineers from around the world. However, when so many people gather to conduct research, it is not only difficult to hold anyone accountable when ethical issues arise, but individual scientists are also prone to falling into the trap of believing that they are not responsible. Second, most scientists and engineers are employed by government agencies or private research institutes. Therefore, even if they feel ethical responsibility, their personal safety is determined by their employer, so when their duties as employees conflict with their ethical responsibilities, scientists and engineers will not be able to readily choose the latter. In other words, scientists and engineers are in a position where it is difficult for them to act as whistleblowers. Third, once science and technology have become an important part of society, it is difficult to prevent the use of that technology when ethical issues arise. If the use of the Internet is prohibited because it causes personal information leaks, it will cause even greater social chaos.
Therefore, social systems must be in place to overcome the above difficulties. First, in order to clarify responsibility, socially acceptable principles for the distribution of responsibility are necessary. In addition to the principle that more responsibility is transferred to socially accepted superiors, it is reasonable that technicians who are closer to the application stage than the basic stage should bear more responsibility in terms of technical aspects. However, this does not mean that technicians at the basic stage are not responsible. In many cases, at the basic stage of science and technology, it is uncertain how the results of one’s research will be utilized and what results will be produced. Therefore, scientists and engineers at the basic stage have a responsibility to thoroughly consider how their individual research fits into the overall context of research and how it can be applied in the future, and based on this, they should provide advice to scientists and engineers at later stages. In addition, scientists and engineers should be given the opportunity to speak out responsibly when they recognize ethical issues. To this end, a comprehensive social safety net for whistleblowers is essential. Although there is currently a law called the Whistleblower Protection Act, there are many cases in which whistleblowers are penalized for reasons other than whistleblowing, and there are calls for improvements to the system. Finally, I believe that ethical issues surrounding technologies that already occupy an important position in society should be resolved at the social level through government policy. However, it is necessary to actively utilize the citizens’ consensus conference system in this process. A citizens’ assembly is a forum-style system in which ordinary citizens, selected like jurors in a court of law, exchange opinions with experts on scientific and technological topics, reach a consensus among themselves, and reflect that consensus in the policy-making process. This approach has the advantage of reducing the adverse effects of policy implementation, as policies on science and technology are not simply decided by the government, but also reflect the opinions of citizens. In addition, the citizens’ consensus conference system is positive in that it raises awareness of ethical issues related to technology among not only scientists and engineers but also the general public, thereby enhancing social learning about the ethical issues of specific technologies and enabling citizens themselves to reduce the damage caused by such technologies.
Technology changes society, and society, in turn, influences the development of technology. All of these processes are mediated by scientists and engineers. Therefore, in modern society, where science and technology determine the direction of social development, scientists and engineers are required to have a sense of ethical responsibility. This sense of responsibility can only be fully realized when it is supported by social institutions. If we strive to resolve ethical issues based on accurate insights into the relationship between society and technology, human society will be able to enjoy the positive aspects of technology while minimizing its negative effects.
