Ethics, which is a branch in philosophy, in a boarder sense reflects mankind’s ability in applying reason and regulating their actions for the greater good.It is their moral campus which allows them to be ‘good’ while preventing ‘evil' from prevailing. Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill provide the pillars for what constitutes the discussion of Ethics in philosophy. However, since I am dealing with a case within a realm of science, I am using Søren Kierkegaard's application of Ethics in The Concept of Dread (1844). The method he used renders Ethics as "an ideal science" 1(p15) that ultimately "withstand temptations"1 (p16). Ethics for him is the "binding power" which—unlike the moral base of the usual definition of Ethics —functions
…show more content…
The process is imposed by universities on any research which involves samples of biological materials, such as tissues samples and swaps from humans and animals alike, or human participants, whether it is an interview or survey. The process is vital in securing the followed standards by the institutions and the integrity of the research itself. Also, Ethical Approvals insure that the process of the research is supervised and will not result in a questionable result or harming the participants in any way. In the United Kingdom (UK), Ethical Approval is essential in achieving research excellency and securing higher rates of international recognition. Based on the numbers mentioned in the forward by Rt. Hon. David Willetts MP (Minister for Universities and Science (2010-14)) published in 2012, the research produced by institutions in the UK “attracts 11% of all citations” 5 (p5) emphasizing the importance of conducting a reliable research framed within ethical approved regulations. Furthermore, Ethical Approvals regulate the interactions between researches in the same institution to make sure that they are all equally regulated and supervised. Such process impels PhD students to be more alerted, since they are accountable for any possible future misconduct. And to self-regulate their own actions because they were positioned as a reflection of the …show more content…
The researcher of the case lacks—or in a better term—violated the four elements intentionally. He violated the elements of honesty and rigour with the way he conducted his pilot study without providing participants with information sheets and the safety buttons which establish the requirements of the ethically approved protocol. Not following the pre-acknowledged protocol, the study does not only risk losing its credibility, but it also damages the reputation of the institution as a respectable place for excellent academic research. For a researcher to be not honest and rigorous means he is allowing for an impulsive research to take shape and to contaminate his findings and results with faulty results which does not reflect the established methodology that has been approved upon and discussed with his supervisor. His violation makes the institution vulnerable for possible future lawsuits that may happen if such misconduct leads to a serious
The process is imposed by universities on any research which involves samples of biological materials, such as tissues samples and swaps from humans and animals alike, or human participants, whether it is an interview or survey. The process is vital in securing the followed standards by the institutions and the integrity of the research itself. Also, Ethical Approvals insure that the process of the research is supervised and will not result in a questionable result or harming the participants in any way. In the United Kingdom (UK), Ethical Approval is essential in achieving research excellency and securing higher rates of international recognition. Based on the numbers mentioned in the forward by Rt. Hon. David Willetts MP (Minister for Universities and Science (2010-14)) published in 2012, the research produced by institutions in the UK “attracts 11% of all citations” 5 (p5) emphasizing the importance of conducting a reliable research framed within ethical approved regulations. Furthermore, Ethical Approvals regulate the interactions between researches in the same institution to make sure that they are all equally regulated and supervised. Such process impels PhD students to be more alerted, since they are accountable for any possible future misconduct. And to self-regulate their own actions because they were positioned as a reflection of the …show more content…
The researcher of the case lacks—or in a better term—violated the four elements intentionally. He violated the elements of honesty and rigour with the way he conducted his pilot study without providing participants with information sheets and the safety buttons which establish the requirements of the ethically approved protocol. Not following the pre-acknowledged protocol, the study does not only risk losing its credibility, but it also damages the reputation of the institution as a respectable place for excellent academic research. For a researcher to be not honest and rigorous means he is allowing for an impulsive research to take shape and to contaminate his findings and results with faulty results which does not reflect the established methodology that has been approved upon and discussed with his supervisor. His violation makes the institution vulnerable for possible future lawsuits that may happen if such misconduct leads to a serious