Penders Bart
Care and Public Health Research Institute (Caphri), Department of Health, Ethics and Society (HES), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, NL-6200MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J Bioeth Inq. 2018 Mar;15(1):29-32. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9825-6. Epub 2017 Dec 12.
Academic misconduct distorts the relationship between scientific practice and the knowledge it produces. The relationship between science and the knowledge it produces is, however, not something universally agreed upon. In this paper I will critically discuss the moral status of an act of research misconduct, namely plagiarism, in the context of different epistemological positions. While from a positivist view of science, plagiarism only influences trust in science but not the content of the scientific corpus, from a constructivist point of view both are at stake. Consequently, I argue that discussions of research misconduct and responsible research ought to be explicitly informed by the authors' views on the relationship between science and the knowledge it produces.
学术不端行为扭曲了科学实践与其所产生知识之间的关系。然而，科学与其所产生知识之间的关系并非是普遍被认同的。在本文中，我将在不同认识论立场的背景下，批判性地讨论一种研究不端行为（即抄袭）的道德地位。从实证主义的科学观来看，抄袭仅影响对科学的信任，而不影响科学知识体系的内容；但从建构主义的观点来看，两者都受到威胁。因此，我认为对研究不端行为和负责任研究的讨论应该明确地基于作者对科学与其所产生知识之间关系的看法。
