Criminal scientists Dominik, Dmitry, Girma, Jia and Ruisheng

L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists guilty of manslaughter

Scientific Point of View Responsibility of Scienctists  Should the scientists be responsible for negative effect or catastrophe?  Whether the scientists tell the truth or cast for general public? Role of Science Exploring unknown and/or solving problems? Can science solve all of the problems?

From point of view of society ● Did experts act in an ethical way? – Scientific responsibility Objectivity, error estimation – Social responsibility Official role, political influence, communication ● Ethical to sue the commission? – Scientists did nothing wrong Prediction impossible, Scientists can't exclude earthquake – Judges will answer the question of guilt Victims opinion is checked by the court

Was it ethical for the court to hold a trial on the scientists? ● Did the jury and judge have the scientific knowledge to judge the scientists??? ● Wasn’t it necessary to have a specially kind of court where the scientists could have been judged by scientists?

FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE TODAY: ● Should we pursue research in all directions? If yes, who will collect knowledge, administrate them, and take a decision in the end? ● What is post-science and how does the World look like after science? SCIENTIFIC ADMINISTRATION: ● Does the state still pose the questions to Science? ● Administrative organization of science is no longer adequate! The research community was not able to detect the problem in time. What kind of institution we want after reformation? ● Does one need particular specialization? CONCLUDING REMARKS