Ethics in Science: The Unique Consequences of Chemistry
This article discusses the ethical issues unique to the science and practice of chemistry. These issues arise from chemistry’s position in the middle between the theoretical and the practical, a science concerned with molecules that are of the right size to directly affect human life. Many of the issues are raised by the central activity of chemistry––synthesis. Chemists make thousands of new substances each year. Many are beneficial, but others are threats. Since the development of the chemical industry in the nineteenth century, chemistry has contributed to the deterioration of the environment but has also helped to reduce pollution. Finally, we discuss the role of codes of ethics and whether the current codes of conduct for chemists are adequate for the challenges of today’s world.
Security risk assessment and management in chemical plants: Challenges and new trends
The present study is to point out the outcomes of the Seminar on the Chemical Weapon Convention and Chemical Safety and Security Management for Member States in the Asia Region held by Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in Doha, Qatar, in February 2017. The seminar was aimed at supporting chemical safety and security (CSS) management in the chemical industry in Asian countries. Overall goal was to sensitize States Parties to the new approaches that can be adopted in relation to CSS management, with a particular focus on providing assistance to small and medium‐sized enterprises. This article reflects the observations made by keynote speakers via their interaction with participants from Asian State Parties during presentations' questions & answers sessions and following workshops. The article is an attempt to highlight the challenges in security risk assessment and management of chemical facilities and discuss some new trends for further improvements. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog 37: 211–220, 2018
The Good as Form and Quality
IN A PREVIOUSLY published paper' I have sought to show that the dispute between relativism and absolutism in ethics can be resolved by recognizing that the good is relative but the right is absolute. There is a general consensus of competent opinion that every person ought to do that which is conducive to the greatest good of all concerned. This general principle may be taken as absolute. But the good varies with every change of conditions. What is good in, or for, one person is not necessarily good in, or for, another or in, or for, the same person on a different occasion. Thus the admission of the general principle that it is right to do the greatest possible good involves two consequences: (a) that in every particular situation there is an absolute distinction between what is right and what is wrong-whatever would produce less than the greatest possible good is wrong; (b) that there can be no absolute principles of secondary generality, such as "Thou shalt not kill"; for, since the good is relative to individual differences and changing conditions, such secondary principles cannot possibly be framed in a way which would direct us to the greatest good of all persons under all conditions. In this paper I wish to show that the good at which we ought to aim can be known and that the greatest possible good can be discovered with a considerable measure of accuracy; for, as argued in the paper referred to, the good at which we ought to aim is not moral good but