Citing Nazi research

[Babbler]

If it correct, use it, and thank God we didn't have learn it ourselves.

 

[StarWorms]

It would be stupid to not use the data if it is there, but obviously there shouldn't be any more of such research.

I agree but to society (or perhaps more how the media portrays it), citing a piece of work like that could be turned around, as if the scientist supports what they did.

 

[TheBladeRoden]

So we're assuming that the human experiments themselves were wrong even though they could have a net benefit for mankind?

 

[Evil Tyrant]

So we're assuming that the human experiments themselves were wrong even though they could have a net benefit for mankind?

I think it is safe to assume that taking people imprisoned for not matching racial ideals, and forcibly conducting a wide variety of medical experiments on them is wrong. Especially seeing as most test subjects were viciously killed either during the experiments or shortly afterwards.

 

[Che Guava]

I think that all experiments conducted under inhumane circumstances in the past should be published publically so it is fre too all humanity and no-one can ever really 'profit' from it. It sould also be published only with a disclaimer outlining the terrible cost that the information was gathered at...

 

[Warman17]

I don't think any of the research should be used by Party C. Party C may have never done anything, but the way in which the information was obtained is deplorable and very immoral. This information should have never existed in the first place, and as such its very existance should be destroyed; with no reproduction or use of it. Only the knowledge that the act occured, but not its results, should be known.

To use the findings of the research basically validates the research regardless of how it was done. If you can use immorally produced research, why not conduct immoral research yourself if the outcome will be positive?

 

[Che Guava]

How can you separate the results from the knowledge. knowledge is the analysis of results, and an integral part of preserving the scientific method is allowing others to read and interpret your results....

 

[Warman17]

How can you separate the results from the knowledge. knowledge is the analysis of results, and an integral part of preserving the scientific method is allowing others to read and interpret your results....

The results won't be known. There will be no knowledge of the findings. The knowledge will be in the known fact that the research was conducted; but there will be no knowledge of what the results were. The results are do to immoral practices and as such are not worthy to be known.

 

[classical_hero]

Obviously we have slipped so far that we are willing to use corrupt findings for "the greater good". This is disgusting that people are even suggesting that we use these methods.

 

[Bad Player]

Although most of the human experimentation the Nazis did was scientifically flawed, some of it produced valid, useful results. Most significantly, their amazing disregard for human subject welfare allowed them to discover some useful things about hypothermia that are beyond the scope of any imaginable human-subject-friendly scientific experimentation.

The question is, is it ethically acceptable for scientists to use the data from this research?

More generally, when Party A does something horrible to Party B without B's consent, and something useful comes out of it, is it ethically acceptable for Party C (who has no involvement in the A-B interaction) to use the result of Party A's action for the good of Party C and the rest of humanity?

We use other research that was unethical e.g. Vipeholm study.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

We should also ignore all the research gleaned from people who, during the renaissance, illegally dug up dead bodies and dissected them. That would rid us of most of our knowledge of anatomy and medicine.

[/sarcasm]

 

[classical_hero]

We should also ignore all the research gleaned from people who, during the renaissance, illegally dug up dead bodies and dissected them. That would rid us of most of our knowledge of anatomy and medicine.

[/sarcasm]

You are forgetting th major difference between the two. One is done on already dead people and the other is experiments on living unwilling participants.

 

[EugenB]

I think using the results of these research would be one way to make the lives lost or tortured not in vain, if i were to be one of those tested people, it would give a meaning to my suffering, otherwise all of it would be for nothing. Plus, it smells like stupidity to not use information, just because it came from a bad source, the information is not by itself evil, on the contrary can be used to save lives. The only morale issue would be that it in this case it could encourage others to do the same, because afterwards we'll say 'its good info' and he'll escape the punishment, like the nazis and japanese.

 

[Bad Player]

I think using the results of these research would be one way to make the lives lost or tortured not in vain, if i were to be one of those tested people, it would give a meaning to my suffering, otherwise all of it would be for nothing. Plus, it smells like stupidity to not use information, just because it came from a bad source, the information is not by itself evil, on the contrary can be used to save lives. The only morale issue would be that it in this case it could encourage others to do the same, because afterwards we'll say 'its good info' and he'll escape the punishment, like the nazis and japanese.

You mean like the Nazi scientists that led the space mission for NASA?

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

You are forgetting th major difference between the two. One is done on already dead people and the other is experiments on living unwilling participants.

Both were considered immoral.

 

[Brighteye]

Knowledge can never be evil. Only acts can be evil.
The knowledge gained from these experiments should be retained and used. The acts comitted to obtain the knowledge are a different subject entirely.

 

[plarq]

However, we may need a redux for these data if we suspect its credibility.

Heck, let's poison our innocent mouse again!