ethics: (n). 1. A principle of right or good conduct. 2. A system of moral principles or values. 3. The rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profession. (American Heritage Dictionary, 1976.)

Please start by reading Ethics in Science by Henry Bauer available online at  http://www.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/ethics/hbauer/hbauer-toc.html Discuss the concepts with a friend, colleague, someone in your family, or another member of the class.  How important are scientific and professional ethics to your confidence in the process of science?


Then, read the following situation.  And decide individually if each of the following scientific activities is ethical, and if you decide they are not, explain why you feel the activity is not ethical. Record your observations and those of your discussion partner. Pay careful attention to where your answers are different from those of your partner, and why.   Refer to what Bauer discussed in your response.  Turn in a typed, spell-checked essay of at least 250 words with your observations, and your explanations. 

The situation: Scientists recently announced that a meteorite found in Antarctica, which clearly originated from Mars. The rock was probably blown into space from the surface of Mars during a volcanic event or meteor impact, and after many years drifted into Earth's gravitational field, and ultimately hit our planet. The specimen was analyzed and found to contain small cavities and microfossils similar to those found in Earth rocks which are created by elementary single-celled organisms. This announcement created significant controversy in the scientific community, as you might imagine. Did the Mars rock show life existed at some time on that planet? Was the research flawed -- the specimen contaminated, or the results mis-interpreted? Imagine in this context:

1. Scientist "A" publishes her findings about life on Mars in a peer-reviewed journal, holds a press conference, then releases her data to peers.
    
2. Another scientist "B" reads about the results of "A", and tries to duplicate results without telling "A" about the trials.
    
3. Scientist "C" writes a review article about the discovery of life on Mars, but had nothing himself to do with the discovery. "C" cites the work done by "A".
    
4. Scientist "D" is interviewed by the local media about the discovery, and mentions the evidence but apparently does not cite the work done by "A".
    
5. Scientist "E" reads the article, sees the conference, and then derides and condemns "A" for jumping to conclusions, without yet seeing the data. "E" is interviewed and publishes an article about why the data are probably wrong.