Openness versus Secrecy in Scientific Research Abstract.

IF 1.3 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology Pub Date : 2006-02-01 DOI:10.3366/epi.2005.2.3.135
David B Resnik
{"title":"Openness versus Secrecy in Scientific Research Abstract.","authors":"David B Resnik","doi":"10.3366/epi.2005.2.3.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Openness is one of the most important principles in scientific inquiry, but there are many good reasons for maintaining secrecy in research, ranging from the desire to protect priority, credit, and intellectual property, to the need to safeguard the privacy of research participants or minimize threats to national or international security. This article examines the clash between openness and secrecy in science in light of some recent developments in information technology, business, and politics, and makes some practical suggestions for resolving conflicts between openness and secrecy.\"By academic freedom I understand the right to search for the truth and to publish and teach what one holds to be true. This right also implies a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true. It is evident that any restriction of academic freedom serves to restrain the dissemination of knowledge, thereby impeding rational judgment and action.\"Albert Einstein, quotation inscribed on his statute in front of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.</p>","PeriodicalId":46716,"journal":{"name":"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2006-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991133/pdf/nihms33449.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2005.2.3.135","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Openness is one of the most important principles in scientific inquiry, but there are many good reasons for maintaining secrecy in research, ranging from the desire to protect priority, credit, and intellectual property, to the need to safeguard the privacy of research participants or minimize threats to national or international security. This article examines the clash between openness and secrecy in science in light of some recent developments in information technology, business, and politics, and makes some practical suggestions for resolving conflicts between openness and secrecy."By academic freedom I understand the right to search for the truth and to publish and teach what one holds to be true. This right also implies a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true. It is evident that any restriction of academic freedom serves to restrain the dissemination of knowledge, thereby impeding rational judgment and action."Albert Einstein, quotation inscribed on his statute in front of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科学研究中的公开与保密 摘要。
公开性是科学探究中最重要的原则之一,但在研究中保密也有很多充分的理由,从保护优先权、信用和知识产权的愿望,到保护研究参与者隐私或最大限度地减少对国家或国际安全威胁的需要,不一而足。本文结合信息技术、商业和政治领域的一些最新发展,探讨了科学领域公开与保密之间的冲突,并为解决公开与保密之间的冲突提出了一些切实可行的建议。这种权利也意味着一种义务;一个人不得隐瞒他所承认的真理的任何部分。显然,对学术自由的任何限制都会限制知识的传播,从而阻碍理性的判断和行动。"阿尔伯特-爱因斯坦,刻在华盛顿特区国家科学院前他的雕像上的语录。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
48
期刊最新文献
The Value of Risk in Transformative Experience The Hard Problem of Access for Epistemological Disjunctivism In Defence of the Acquaintance Principle in Aesthetics Evidentialism, Judgment, and Suspension: Meeting Sosa's Challenges The Rationality of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1