Ciencia para la paz y el desarrollo: el caso del ... - unesdoc - Unesco

Ciencia para la paz y el desarrollo: el caso del Juramento Hipocrático para Científicos
results or their application or even in many cases over the planning of their work. Nevertheless
this must not prevent the individual scientist from making a sincere attempt to continually judge
the possible consequences of his/her research, to make these judgments known, and to refrain
from such research as he/she deems to be unethical.
In this connection the following should particularly be considered:
1. Research shall be so directed that its applications and other consequences do not cause
significant ecological damage.
2. Research shall be so directed that its consequences do not render it more difficult for
present and future generations to lead a secure existence. Scientific efforts shall therefore
not aim at applications or skills for use in war or oppression. Nor shall research be so directed
that its consequences conflict with basic human rights as expressed in international
agreements on civic, political, economic, social and cultural rights.
3. The scientist has a special responsibility to assess carefully the consequences of his/her
research, and to make them public.
4. Scientists who form the judgment that the research which they are conducting or participating
in is in conflict with this code, shall discontinue such research, and publicly state
the reasons for their judgment. Such judgments shall take into consideration both the
probability and the gravity of the negative consequences involved.
It is of urgent importance that the scientific community support colleagues who find themselves
forced to discontinue their research for the reasons given in this code.
[45] En 1984, el Grupo de Investigación Wittenberg, por entonces en la República Democrática Alemana
(DDR), un grupo liderado por Hans Peter Gensichen, publicó, en forma independiente, un Código
de Ética muy similar al de la Universidad de Uppsala. (H.P. Gensichen, Wissenschaftethik heute,
KF19-84, Für innerkirchlichen Gebrauch). Una versión en sueco de este código se la puede también
encontrar en Rydén (1990).
[46] Compromiso sobre la Iniciativa de Defensa Estratégica (1985)
The pledge of non-participation
We, the undersigned science and engineering faculty, believe that the Strategic Defense Initiative
(SDI) program (commonly known as Star Wars) is ill-conceived and dangerous.
Anti-ballistic missile defense of sufficient reliability to defend the population of the United
States against a Soviet attack is not technically feasible. A system of more limited capability
will only serve to escalate the arms race by encouraging the development of both additional
offensive overkill and an all-out competition in anti ballistic missile weapons. The program will
jeopardize existing arms control agreements and make arms control negotiation even more difficult
than it is at present. The program is a step toward the type of weapons and strategy likely
to trigger a nuclear holocaust.
For these reasons, we believe that the SDI program represents, not an advance toward genuine
safety, but rather a major step backwards. The likelihood that SDI funding will restrict academic
freedom and blur the distinction between classified and unclassified research is greater than
for other sources of funding. The structure of SDI research programs makes it likely that groups
doing only unclassified research will be part of a Research Consortium and will therefore work
closely with other universities and industries doing classified research. SDI officials openly concede
that any successful unclassified project may become classified. Moreover, the potentially
sensitive nature of the research may invoke legal restrictions required by the Export Administration
Act. Participation in SDI by individual researchers would lend their institution’s name to
98 Estudios y documentos de política científica de América Latina y el Caribe. Vol. 2.