首页> 外文期刊>Sociology of health & illness >Neuroscientists' everyday experiences of ethics: The interplay of regulatory, professional, personal and tangible ethical spheres
【24h】

Neuroscientists' everyday experiences of ethics: The interplay of regulatory, professional, personal and tangible ethical spheres

机译:神经科学家的日常道德经验:监管,专业,个人和有形伦理领域的相互作用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The ethical issues neuroscience raises are subject to increasing attention, exemplified in the emergence of the discipline neuroethics. While the moral implications of neurotechnological developments are often discussed, less is known about how ethics intersects with everyday work in neuroscience and how scientists themselves perceive the ethics of their research. Drawing on observation and interviews with members of one UK group conducting neuroscience research at both the laboratory bench and in the clinic, this article examines what ethics meant to these researchers and delineates four specific types of ethics that shaped their day-to-day work: regulatory, professional, personal and tangible. While the first three categories are similar to those identified elsewhere in sociological work on scientific and clinical ethics, the notion of 'tangible ethics' emerged by attending to everyday practice, in which these scientists' discursive distinctions between right and wrong were sometimes challenged. The findings shed light on how ethical positions produce and are, in turn, produced by scientific practice. Informing sociological understandings of neuroscience, they also throw the category of neuroscience and its ethical specificity into question, given that members of this group did not experience their work as raising issues that were distinctly neuro-ethical.
机译:神经科学引起的伦理问题受到越来越多的关注,例如学科神经伦理学的出现就是例证。尽管人们经常讨论神经技术发展的道德含义,但人们对伦理学如何与神经科学的日常工作相交以及科学家们如何看待研究伦理学的了解却很少。通过对在实验室工作台和诊所进行神经科学研究的一个英国小组的成员进行观察和访谈,本文研究了伦理学对这些研究人员的意义,并描述了构成他们日常工作的四种特定的伦理学类型:规范,专业,个人和有形。尽管前三类与在科学和临床伦理学的社会学工作中其他地方所确定的相似,但“有形伦理学”的概念是通过日常实践出现的,这些科学家有时会质疑对与错之间的话语区分。这些发现揭示了道德立场是如何产生的,以及科学实践又是如何产生的。考虑到该小组的成员没有因为提出明显不同的神经伦理问题而经历过他们的工作,他们在告知神经科学的社会学理解时,也将神经科学的范畴及其伦理学特性提出了质疑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号