You're more likely to avoid a catastrophe in science if you are first aware of the many challenges that go hand-in-hand with experimentation. One challenge is knowing the difference between wisdom and knowledge. Sometimes scientists forget the ethics behind what they do, simply because they remain so close to their own work. This "de-humanization" of scientists happens when they love their work so much it becomes an impediment. It's crucial to keep a broad vision and consider every viewpoint regarding research and implementation. A detachment from the sense of responsibility sometimes comes from the technology behind the science. Pressing a button to launch a nuclear missile is one example; publishing the recipe for the 1918 strain of influenza that killed 50 million people worldwide is another. To answer the controversial facets of biology and medicine over the last century, the study of bioethics was created. It continues to play an integral function in the development of science and technology to this day.
Not-for-profit "watchdog" organizations serve to regulate bioethics, largely due to their objective approach to scrutinizing new and existing theories, technologies and applications. Civil liberties, as well as military and corporate influence are a few factors that determine how ethics are defined in each case. Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), based in the United Kingdom, was formed in 1992 when several organizations previously focused on eliminating weapons of mass destruction merged, widening their focus to tackle the misuse of science and technology in general. SGR has since played a leading role in several important conferences around controversial issues in science and technology, holding that continuing the discourse in these areas is key. The Lifeboat Foundation is dedicated to reducing the risks around increasingly powerful technologies, including nanotechnology, artificial intelligence and genetic engineering, even going so far to state on its website that "in some situations, it might be feasible to relinquish technological capacity in the public interest." In other words, while maintaining an intellectually-rich and impelling science culture is important, it's not always in the public's best interest to share the details of that science. But this kind of collective responsibility requires the contributions of many socially-minded individuals.
Science responsibility is demonstrated through the work of individual scientists and other industry professionals dedicated to preserving human rights and increasing the quality of life. Traditionally educated individuals have a responsibility to teach citizen scientists (apprentices or novices with less formal experience) about the importance of ethics, scrutiny and discretion in their work. For instance, biologists should consider the implications of publishing recipes for viruses online, and physicians should give patients an unbiased look at each treatment and medication. But the science industry also has a responsibility to these professionals. Those who selflessly expose unethical behavior and incompetence, for instance -- called 'whistle blowers' -- must be protected from retaliation. Loyalty to the scientific enterprise should be praised, not punished. Considering these factors is now more important than ever, just as new technologies become available and corporate money and influence flood all sectors of science.
Dwelling on the negative potential of science defeats the point of continuing the research, so it's best to maintain the viability of the research. Who will be helped by the cure? How will current research pave the way for future related research? These are questions responsible scientists ask themselves when considering a new task. But good science is also about following the rules. The scientific method and other useful standards like peer review maintain the credibility of the work. Still, it's necessary for any scientist to have a strong personal ethic, as much of the work is based on charting the unknown. As Botanist Liberty Hyde Bailey said, "The very essence of science is to reason from the known to the unknown."