Premium
The case for mandatory inclusion of ethics within the zoological sciences curriculum
Author(s) -
BUCKERIDGE John S.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
integrative zoology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 34
ISSN - 1749-4877
DOI - 10.1111/j.1749-4877.2006.00011.x
Subject(s) - morality , engineering ethics , curriculum , inclusion (mineral) , value (mathematics) , function (biology) , normative ethics , malpractice , environmental ethics , professional ethics , political science , meta ethics , sociology , information ethics , law , engineering , social science , philosophy , computer science , biology , machine learning , evolutionary biology
Traditionally, undergraduate science curricula include little or no “ethics,” either as theory or practice. However, zoologists are currently enjoying considerable media exposure: some of it positive (as in conservation practice), but more often negative (pertaining to issues such as the use of animals for testing of drugs, and genetic engineering). More than ever before, zoologists are being asked to make value judgments, and many of these involve moral assessment; if we accept that zoologists (along with other scientists) are professionals, then we must accept that they are responsible for any decisions they make, and it then follows that they are accountable, which can have serious ramifications in cases of malpractice. Ethics involves the application of morality in a professional setting. In light of this, teaching ethics is mandatory in degree programs such as engineering and medicine. This paper contends that a key output of zoological education is the undergraduate who is cognizant of the ethical framework and constructs within which he/she must function. The paper concludes with comment on the nature and style of delivery of ethics education.