Modern ethics were devised from these two basic ethical beliefs in an attempt to combine the best aspects. Generally, the morally “right” action benefits the majority while affecting the fewest amount in a negative way. Modern ethics are essentially the best of both worlds, eliminating the realist issue with Kantianism and the strictness of Utilitarianism. Modern ethics will be used in this examination of whether or not possessing knowledge carries ethical responsibility. An overview of modern ethics is able to be applied to the possession of knowledge. The state of possessing knowledge does not entail responsibility; rather, how that knowledge is applied must be evaluated for the social and ethical implications. One must consider morals when knowledge is distributed, acted upon, or even falsely delivered.
The most obvious responsibility when possessing knowledge is truth. Scientific experts are sometimes blindly trusted in their field of study. Phil Jones, previously one of the White House experts on global warming, betrayed the trust of the public by admitting that he used a technique in his studies to hide the decline of recent temperatures, thus inflating the issue of global warming. This is an example of a scientist was trusted and respected but used his knowledge unethically. An expert is someone who is widely recognized as a reliable source of information on a specific topic due to extensive studies or schooling. Experts have the responsibility to not only avoid publishing lies, but also to avoid publishing information which is not backed by research and evidence. This is the ethical responsibility of experts to refrain from misleading the public.
There are situations where possessing knowledge causes no harm, but sharing it could. J. Robert Oppenheimer, “father of the atomic bomb,” is famous for his work leading the Manhattan project. The Manhattan project was the United States nuclear weapons research during WWII and eventually produced the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the war. Referring back to utilitarianism, these atomic bombs would be considered ethical because while they did result in the deaths of many innocent Japanese citizens, they saved countless more lives by ending the war quickly after 4 years of bloodshed. Nuclear research is a field where the researchers might be more inclined to withhold information to avoid unethical use. This is the only obvious ethical solution. However, this could also be considered unethical if the research could be used to improve the standard of life. For example, nuclear research, instead of being used to create nuclear bombs, could be used to develop more safe and reliable nuclear power. Nuclear power could be the solution to the renewable energy source the world needs, but the research would never progress if scientists do not share or publish their findings.
In general, science involves more knowledge which garners ethical responsibility than almost any other area of knowledge. Scientific studies can improve the world or cause great harm to it and scientists are ethically obligated to make decisions based on modern morals and principles. Despite the obvious consequences, humans will continue researching more efficient and effective weapons. Scientist responsibility lies with how their research is used based on who they share their results with. Scientists are ethically bound to prevent destruction based on their research.
It is important to remember that knowledge may be gained using senses and is not restricted to scientific research or study. An example of this would be a witness in a murder. This witness is ethically, and legally, responsible to relay his or her knowledge of the events as accurately as possible. A credible witness is one who has acted ethically and whose testimony is unbiased. One of the Ten Commandments in the Bible states, “Thou shall not bear false witness.” While this does not specifically refer to court witnesses, it does refer to lying. The Ten Commandments are one of the earliest forms of a set of ethical laws which became a fundamental piece of both Christianity and Judaism. Ethical decision-making has existed since in the beginning of time, but as technology progresses, humanity is faced with more important and controversial decisions.
Given that harm to anyone or anything will not ensue, possessing knowledge carries with it the duty to share the knowledge. Reserving knowledge can be extremely detrimental and is considered ethically wrong. It is the responsibility of knowledge holders to be a source for other people. This is shown most effectively in school. Last year, I struggled with my Spanish class and eventually decided to get a tutor. Instead of having to search for a tutor who was willing to assist me, numerous classmates approached me and offered to help. This is an example of morally just decisions by my classmates. They were never tempted to withhold information from me, and instead sought me out to share their knowledge and understanding.
Ultimately, the possession of knowledge entails a responsibility to share and spread ideas. Modern ethics dictates that the decisions must be made which benefit the most while preventing harm to the rest. The right to knowledge cannot be impeded and we are ethically responsibly to distribute valid information in order to abstain from spreading falsehoods. Knowledge can be extremely powerful and purposefully misleading creates ignorance. Knowledge implies the use of cognitive processes such as perception, communication, association, and reasoning, and to betray these processes causes eternal doubt and skepticism. Therefore, the possession and distribution both carry ethical responsibilities which must be observed.
Word Count: 1263