【作者】 刘芳；

【导师】 王恩华；

【作者基本信息】 湖南工业大学 ， 伦理学， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 学术的本质是求真，目的是求善。学术研究的结果，可能为人类造福，也可能危害社会。在科学建构中应把求善作为学术的最终目标来确定。在学术研究中当求真与求善产生矛盾时，研究者对科学知识一味的强烈追求时必须以人文关怀为宗旨。对有害的科研项目加以终止，具有较大争论的科研项目必须暂停，给社会带来不利后果的科研成果进行抹杀，仅给为人类造福的科研成果开绿灯。因此，伦理学上的学术自由必须是有限的，其境界是善。首先，学术自由是科学繁荣的前提，为求知而学术，不为任何其它利益而寻求智慧，“无待”的境界，也是求知的最高的境界。科学技术是第一生产力，社会要发展，离不开科学，没有学术自由，就没有科学创造，也许会停在原地，阻碍学者的研究与发展，过强的社会干预扼杀了科学自由，必然导致对科学发展的破坏。其次，学术绝对自由会导致学术功利化、盲目化，趋向人类中心主义；研究出来的成果会给整个人类社会造成不堪设想的局面，突飞猛进的科学技术，给我们带来了福祉，也让我们面临着巨大的风险。最后，科学必须有益于人类，科学家应承担社会责任，对科学家的科研行为做出有效地控制和约束，同时为建立更完善的科学家行为规范提供一些现实依据，并为解决科学自由的有限性提供更加有效地保障措施。正确理解学术自由的有限性是实现学术繁荣的前提。所以从事学术研究所享有的学术自由是有限的。本文采用科技伦理学、科学哲学、科学史等多学科的研究成果和方法，以唯物辩证法为指导，运用文献分析研究法、比较研究法、日常语义分析法等方法对科学自由问题进行分析，同时借鉴国内外现有研究成果的基础上做进一步的研究。本文的旨意是学术自由必须在对社会有利的条件下规范运行，否则就违背了社会发展规律。科学技术的终极价值判断不是取决于为“科学而科学”的单纯理念,而取决于科学是否求真之余又向善，对人类有益的科学是求真、趋善、达美的统一。更多还原

【Abstract】 The essence of academy is the seeking for truth and the purpose of it isthe seeking for kindness. The result of academic research can bring benefit tomankind and may also do harm to them. Seeking for kindness should be theultimate goal of academic research in the scientific construction. When thereis a contradiction between seeking for truth and seeking for kindness,researchers should follow the principle of humanistic care in the strong pursuitof scientific knowledge. Harmful research projects should be terminated, thecontroversial scientific research projects must be suspend and the adverseconsequences of scientific research projects to society must be obliterate whilethe one which can bring benefit to mankind must be encouraged. Therfore, theacademic freedom in ethics must be limited and the ultimate purpose ofacademic research is kindness.To begin with, academic freedom is the premise of scientific prosperity.We should do academic research to gain knowledge and not to gain wisdomfor other benefit. The state of “non-restrait” is the highest state of gainingknowledge. Science and technology is the primary productivity force. Scienceis vital to the development of society. If there is no academic freedom, there isno scientific creation. The scientific research may stop and the research anddevelopment of the researchers will be hindered. Too strong socialintervention will strangle the freedom of academy which will inevitably bring destruction to scientific development.Then, absolute academic freedom will lead to academic utilitariantendency, blindness and anthropocentricism. The research result undersuch freedom will bring disastrous situation to the whole human society.The rapid progress of science and technology will bring us welfare as wellas huge risks.At last, science must be beneficial to mankind and scientists shouldtake the social responsibility. Their research behavior should beeffectively controlled and restrained, sounder behavior criterion ofscientists’should be built up and more effective guarantee measures willbe adopted to deal with the limitation of scientific freedom. So it isnecessary to have a serious discussion and analysis on the scientists’socialresponsibility. A correct understanding of the limitation of academicfreedom is the premise of scientific prosperity. As a result, the academicfreedom is limited and should be limited.Under the guidance of materialist dialectics, the thesis adopts theresearch results and methods of multi-disciplines such as science andtechnology ethics, philosophy of science, history of science to analyse andstudy the problem of science freedom by using the literature analysis method,comparative study, daily semantic analysis based on the existing researchresults home and abroad.This thesis tends to illustrate that academic freedom must run underthe favorable conditions of social norms.Otherwise it will violate the laws of social development. The ultimate value judgments in science andtechnology do not depend on a simple concept of“science for science”,but depends on whether science is truth-seeking as well askindness-seeking, whether science which is beneficial to mankind reachesa unity of truth, kindness and beauty.更多还原