In an editorial in Science for November 19, Sir Joseph Rotblat has considered the desirability of a parallel to the Hippocratic oath which scientists should recognise, just as it has been customary, at least until very recently, to recognise the ethical commitment of members of the medical profession to high standards of conduct, through the medium of the celebrated oath.
Rotblat points out that the relation between science and society has changed in the face of the tremendous advances in pure science made during the 20th century. While science has in many respects improved the quality of human life, its application has imposed great perils. The old distinction between pure and applied science in relation to ethics, he suggests, no longer holds good. It can no longer be maintained that it is only the commercial applications of science which may render it harmful. Science research is not free from moral standards. "This amoral attitude is in my opinion, actually immoral, because it eschews personal responsibility for the likely consequences of one's actions."
There is much talk of human rights, but little recognition of human responsibilities. Scientists, like other citizens, must be accountable for their own actions. National academies of science should include ethics in their terms of reference, and professional organisations should devise official codes of conduct for guidance of their members and of students wishing to enter them.
Professor Rotblat recommends the pledge initiated by the Student Pugwash Group in the United States: "I promise to work for a better world, where science and technology are used in socially responsible ways. I will not use my education for any purpose intended to harm human beings or the environment. Throughout my career, I will consider the ethical implications of my work before I take action. While the demands placed upon me may be great, I sign this declaration because I recognise that individual responsibility is the first step on the path to peace."