心理学研究中的伦理

本文介绍了美国心理学会关于科学研究的伦理原则和相关的规定,以及结合心理学科研实践讨论怎样实施这些原则与规定。本文对我国心理学的伦理建设有一定参考价值。主要内容如下:1.人类参与的研究; a.知情同意及欺骗; b.自由退出; c.保护免受伤害和事后情况说明; d.清除有害后果; e.保密。2.动物研究的伦理:a.反对研究动物的论点; b.赞成研究动物的论点。c.研究动物的指南。3.科学欺诈。4.监督伦理实践。     

Salomon Maimon’s Attempt at a New Presentation of the Principle of Morality and a New Deduction of Its Reality1

This essay is a translation of one of Salomon Maimon’s ethical writings, accompanied by a brief introduction. In it, Maimon proposes a correction of the Kantian moral principle of duty, as it is articulated both by Kant’s Groundwork for a Metaphysics of Morals and his Critique of Practical Reason. In particular, Maimon’s essay reveals the influence of Reinhold’s critique of Kant’s moral philosophy, especially regarding the role of incentives behind moral action. It reveals as well Maimon’s commitment to the primacy of the theoretical over the practical, drawn from his reading of Maimonides and Spinoza. The essay, therefore, marks an important moment in the development of Maimon’s assimilation of Kantian philosophy, one often neglected in scholarship on his work.     

The composition of R. G. Collingwood's The New Leviathan

Collingwood's The New Leviathan is a difficult text. It comprises philosophy, political theory, political opinion and history in what is sometimes an uneasy amalgam. Despite its being the culmination of thirty years of work in ethics and political theory, the final text was clearly affected by the adverse circumstances under which it was written, these largely being Collingwood's illness which increasingly affected his ability to work as the writing of The New Leviathan progressed. This paper seeks to disentangle the composition of the book thereby shedding light on its distinctive character as the last substantial piece of philosophical work published in Collingwood's lifetime.     

Is There Social Consensus Regarding Researcher Conflicts of Interest?

Consensus around what constitutes researcher conflicts of interest (COIs) and awareness of their influence on our research are two critical steps in ensuring the integrity of our science. In this research, data were collected from individual scholars via 2 surveys 5 years apart and from journals and associations to examine the level of social consensus and moral awareness among scholars, journals, and associations regarding researcher COIs. Although we observed increases in level of social consensus and moral awareness between 2012 and 2017, results still revealed limited agreement about what relationships constitute a COI and limited awareness about the presence of and the ethical issues surrounding COIs. Although all journals and associations we examined supported COI disclosure, most did not provide researchers with detailed COI-related information, guidance, or disclosure tools. Limited social consensus and moral awareness regarding COIs is problematic because it inhibits the recognition, disclosure, and management of COIs and limits ethical decision making. We need to continue and enhance discussions about COIs and aim to create consensus and awareness where we do not have it with the goal of reducing potential scientific misconduct related to COIs.     

The authorship of Uri Zohar: the ethics and aesthetics of the Archimedean lever

This article discusses Zohar’s subversive reflexive aesthetics, termed the “Archimedean-lever ethics,” comprised of three stages: the world rendered from one perspective; the same world rendered from a different perspective, challenging or destroying the first; and awareness of the shift of perspectives. It argues that Zohar’s creative energy, imbued with male sexuality, derives from this collision, and examines its ethical aspect in relation to Zionist values during the 1950s and 1960s. Zionism and Israel should always consider more than one perspective, being able not only to build but also to destroy (convictions, territories) in order to bring change, with destruction thus becoming a particular form of creation. However, in Zohar’s films made during the 1970s, the male sexual energy becomes an endless sexual appetite, expressed mostly through coveting gazes, which is no more than a cover up for male impotency, tantamount to Israel’s endless appetite for land.     

SETI & METI: An Indian Perspective

Critiques consider Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) and Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence (METI) immoral for various reasons. This article is a response to SETI-METI from an Indian perspective, both classical Hindu and Roman Catholic. The article begins with a brief account of what the space programme in India looks like today. Then this article makes two claims: (1) the existence or non-existence of extraterrestrials is not a threat to the Indian mind as the Indian worldview provides sufficient tools to accommodate extraterrestrials; plus (2) Roman Catholic moral theology should reframe its ethical thinking with an inclusive cosmic paradigm to embrace the extraterrestrials.     

The Rise of Citizen Science in Health and Biomedical Research

Citizen science models of public participation in scientific research represent a growing area of opportunity for health and biomedical research, as well as new impetus for more collaborative forms of engagement in large-scale research. However, this also surfaces a variety of ethical issues that both fall outside of and build upon the standard human subjects concerns in bioethics. This article provides background on citizen science, examples of current projects in the field, and discussion of established and emerging ethical issues for citizen science in health and biomedical research.     

How Payment for Research Participation Can Be Coercive

The idea that payment for research participation can be coercive appears widespread among research ethics committee members, researchers, and regulatory bodies. Yet analysis of the concept of coercion by philosophers and bioethicists has mostly concluded that payment does not coerce, because coercion necessarily involves threats, not offers. In this article we aim to resolve this disagreement by distinguishing between two distinct but overlapping concepts of coercion. Consent-undermining coercion marks out certain actions as impermissible and certain agreements as unenforceable. By contrast, coercion as subjection indicates a way in which someone’s interests can be partially set back in virtue of being subject to another’s foreign will. While offers of payment do not normally constitute consent-undermining coercion, they do sometimes constitute coercion as subjection. We offer an analysis of coercion as subjection and propose three possible practical responses to worries about the coerciveness of payment.     

基于非侵入性脑刺激的认知增强：方法、伦理和应用

作为人类追求卓越的方式之一,基于非侵入性脑刺激的认知增强成为众多学科和公众关注的问题。首先阐述了非侵入性脑刺激的两种主要技术手段(经颅磁刺激和经颅直流刺激)的技术原理及其在提升健康个体认知功能上的应用,并分析了这两种技术可能带来的安全、自主选择、公平等伦理问题,最后总结了该认知增强技术在体育和军事等两个具体领域的应用。未来可进一步提高技术手段的深部脑区刺激能力及该增强技术的持续和真实效果。     

Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment: Ethically Equivalent?

Withholding and withdrawing treatment are widely regarded as ethically equivalent in medical guidelines and ethics literature. Health care personnel, however, widely perceive moral differences between withholding and withdrawing. The proponents of equivalence argue that any perceived difference can be explained in terms of cognitive biases and flawed reasoning. Thus, policymakers should clear away any resistance to accept the equivalence stance by moral education. To embark on such a campaign of changing attitudes, we need to be convinced that the ethical analysis is correct. Is it? In this article, I take a closer look at the moral relation between withholding and withdrawing. My conclusion is that withholding and withdrawing are not in general ethically equivalent. Thus, medical guidelines should be rewritten, and rather than being “educated” away from their sound judgments, medical professionals and patients should have nuanced medico-ethical discussions regarding withholding and withdrawing treatment.