As we work on articulating our pillars of research quality so that sponsors know exactly what to expect from us and we have our commitment to quality public, some of the conversation has come back to our ethics as an alliance and how we want to articulate them. R.J. Briggs wrote about compassion as the underlying driver yesterday.
Our pillars of research quality are rooted in our ethics. Executive Director Mahshid Abir and other members are physicians, with the associated professional code of ethics. We want to articulate our code of ethics beyond those rules and principles, because doing research in a rapidly changing world means thinking ahead. The first rule for physicians, do no harm, is solid bedrock. But expanding that to broader ethical frameworks, the direction we want to expand that is into Kant’s categorical imperative:
So act that you use humanity, in your own person as well as in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.
This applies in social science and policy research. Because while people might not be harmed by participating in research, it can be extractive and not give anything back to the people or communities who are the subjects of research. We do not aim to do extractive research.
An astute reader may notice that this is not in line with RJ Brigg’s post that posits that the categorical imperative isn’t enough on its own. Two points from that:
- We’re an alliance, not an amoeba. Discussions and dissent are how we arrive at better conclusions overall.
- Some of our basis for difference is that I believe in the power of innovation and self-determination. I started my thesis work in the belief that better models would make for better buildings that would allow fewer deaths by fire. I finished my dissertation convinced that the problem was oversold shows rather than the buildings themselves. I am deeply convinced that problems that seem to require tradeoffs will eventually reveal solutions on completely different valences than those immediately visible.
Our official documentation is still pending, but this is our basis: a lot of people who think deeply and hard about topics and want to do the right thing, working on how to best articulate that into universal guidance.
Oh, and why is there a dive bar as the featured image? Well, during the meeting we were discussing ethics and compassion, someone asked if something was the hill we wanted to die on. I had been listening to Dessa’s song Rothko, which includes the lines:
Me without a hill to die on Guess I'll have to heal from this Pool cue and a pair of pythons Make my own caduceus
And that imagery always sticks with me, not least because it is fundamentally about reinvention and resilience. Here at APR we are articulating a code of ethics for all of us, not just the physicians, making our own caduceus.
But also, the caduceus is associated with Hermes and was an item of confusion because some 19th century medical textbooks had the caduceus as a printer’s mark, and then in 1902 the US Army Medical Corps adopted it as a symbol. Asclepius was the healer, and his rod only has the one snake on it.