Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Science
Description
Joseph Rotblat (1908-2005) was the only physicist to leave the Manhattan Project for moral reasons before its completion. He would spend the rest of his life advocating for nuclear disarmament. His activities for disarmament resulted in the formation, in 1957, of the Pugwash conferences, which emerged as the leading global forum to advance limits on nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Rotblat's efforts, and the activities of Pugwash, resulted in both being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995. Rotblat is a central figure in the global history of resistance to the spread of nuclear weapons. He also was an important figure in the emergence, after World War II, of a counter-movement to introduce new social justifications for scientific research and new models for ethics and professionalism among scientists. Rotblat embodies the power of the individual scientist to say "no" and thus, at least individually, put limits of conscience on his or her scientific activity. This paper explores the political and ethical choices scientists make as part of their effort to behave responsibly and to influence the outcomes of their work. By analyzing three phases of Rotblat's life, I demonstrate how he pursued his ideal of beneficial science, or science that appears to benefit humanity. The three phases are: (1) his decision to leave the Manhattan Project in 1944, (2) his role in the creation of Pugwash in 1957 and his role in the rise of the organization into international prominence and (3) his winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995. These three phases of Rotblat's life provide a singular window of the history of nuclear weapons and the international movement for scientific responsibility in the 50 years since the bombing of Hiroshima in 1945. While this paper does not provide a complete picture of Rotblat's life and times, I argue that his experiences shed important light on the difficult question of the individual responsibility of scientists.
ContributorsEvans, Alison Dawn (Author) / Zachary, Gregg (Thesis director) / Hurlbut, Ben (Committee member) / Francis, Sybil (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
This study sought to identify traits that act as possible predictors of academic science proficiency of highly gifted adolescent students. A combination of cognitive, personality, and conative traits were selected for evaluation as predictors of scientific proficiency using student General Ability Index (GAI), Revised NEO Personality Index (NEO-PI R), and Kolbe Index scores to evaluate each, respectively. Statistical correlational analyses revealed that high expressions of the conative trait Fact Finder and the personality traits Ideas and Straight-forwardness predicted higher degrees of academic science proficiency. In contrast, lower expressions of the personality traits Excitement Seeking and Order predicted higher degrees of scientific proficiency. Further, stepwise regression confirmed that the NEO-PI R facets of Excitement Seeking and Ideas traits were significant predictors of science proficiency and suggested that the personality trait Vulnerability may also be a predictor. The repeated appearance of the Excitement Seeking and Ideas facets and the dependence of the other identified traits suggests that these traits were the most promising possible predictors of scientific proficiency in highly gifted students and should be the target of future research.
ContributorsRoss, Christian Hamilton (Author) / Lansdowne, Kimberly (Thesis director) / Oakes, Wendy (Committee member) / Young, Michael (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
The landscape of science education is changing. Scientific research and the academy are both becoming increasingly complex, competitive, interdisciplinary, and international. Many federal research agencies, scientific professional societies, and science educators seem to agree on the importance of strong ethics education to help young scientists navigate this increasingly craggy terrain. But, what actually should be done? When it comes to teaching ethics to future scientists, is the apparent current emphasis on basic responsible conduct of research (RCR) sufficient, or should moral theory also be taught in science ethics education? In this thesis I try engage this question by focusing on an existing, related debate on whether moral theory should be part of teaching professional ethics more generally. After delving into the respective approaches promoted by the three primary participants in this debate (C. E. Harris, Bernard Gert, and Michael Davis) I unpack their views in order to ascertain their practical application potential and relative benefits. I then take these findings and apply them to ethics education in science, paying particular attention to its purported learning objectives. In the end I conclude that the presentation of these objectives suggests that moral theory may well be required in order for these objectives of ethics education in science to be fully achieved.
ContributorsMilleson, Valerye Michelle (Author) / Robert, Jason (Thesis advisor) / Herkert, Joseph (Committee member) / Ellison, Karin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014