andThe era of the Royal Society met yesterday to discuss, as they put it, “the behavior of colleagues.” In light of the resignation of two colleagues and an open message It was signed by approximately 3,500 worldsMany, including me, expect the discussion to focus on the behavior of a specific colleague: Elon Musk.
As one of the most scientific institutions in the world, the Royal Society bears the responsibility of maintaining standards among its colleagues. Musk, who was accepted as a colleague in 2018 for his technological innovations, recently participated in the behavior that contradicts the community behavior blog. In particular, many scientists were subjected to his assault on science behavior in the United States and beyond as head of the “government efficiency management” in the Trump administration (DOGE) as well as his malicious accusations against scholars of scholars (such as Anthony Fushi) And Other public personalities.
Musk is an important figure (some argue More Important) in the administration of the United States that puts the blockade of science and the scientific investigation itself. The orders of the new executive management led to the restriction of research, Silence of climate scientists and Financing As part of a Curriculum From the scientific community.
By taking measures against one of the members whose behavior is public in opposing the values of society and the rules of behavior, the Royal Society has confirmed its commitment to moral standards and helped enhance general confidence in science.
So I felt disappointed more than reading A statement issued by the Royal Society After the meeting, which was not mentioned at all musk. The statement realized “the need to defend science and scientists around the world in the face of the increasing challenges that science faces,” but without a clear measure to address the musk position, these words are floundering.
The rules of the royal association of colleagues state that “colleagues and foreign members do not behave or Failure In any way that would undermine the mission of society or bring society in a bad situation.
Some have argued that expelling musk It can harm the confidence of the public in science; Through the lack of clarity of the borders between science and politics, society will harm the integrity of science. I believe that this perspective ignores the decisive role that scientific institutions play in supporting moral standards and defending the safety of science, especially in some cases, science and scientists are subject to threats and intimidation from political institutions.
I was once told at the beginning of my career: “Everything is political, especially the things that people tell you are not political. These are the most political ever.” There is some truth about that when it comes to science. The intersection of science and politics is inevitable and of vital importance. Scientists have a unique experience in a place to treat enlightened policies and social progress. The embrace of the political participation of scientists allows the fulfillment of their moral responsibilities, defending the safety of their work and contributing useful in facing the complex challenges facing society today.
The disengagement on political issues that surround and influence science is not the virtue that some commentators believe. If there is anything, this is a betrayal of the deep effect that can have science and must have it on the world. In particular, the failure to act on Musk behavior will not only seek those who seek to practice political influence on science and scientists – and erosion of the basic principles of science.
For me, it is time to take a small position as it might be, and to distance myself from the royal society until the time when it has the moral courage to agree specifically on the measures taken by musk to undermine the flag in the United States and other places. I will resign from my position as a co -editor in the Journal of the Royal Society Open science With an immediate effect. I will not search for the magazines of the royal community or work as a reference for them. I would like to urge my colleagues to do the same.
The royal society is right in its statement that it needs to “defend science and scientists at a time when these threats are exposed as it has not happened before, yet at the same time it was not more necessary for humanity as a whole” – but without taking a concrete society to impose its own rules and defend its scientific safety, I cannot confirm to call for the defense of the wide scientific community.
-
Kit Yates Professor of Sports and General Participation at Bath University and author of the book ” Mathematics of life and death and How to expect what is unexpected
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you want to provide a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered to be published in our messages section, please click here.