The Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE) expects its members and partners to adhere to the highest ethical standards.
Members and partners (canonical scientists, canonical engineers, other scientists and mathematicians, historians, philosophers, graduate and undergraduate students, and others) of the Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE) have obligations –when applicable– to this Center, to Human race, to public, to colleagues, to other people, to environment, and to canonical science.
The principles of conduct enumerated below are the minimal standards of ethical behavior relating to several critical aspects of the canonical endeavor, and were prepared for the guidance of the members of the Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE) in everyday canonical activities. This code has been updated to 2008, February 03.
Members of the Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE) may follow this code of conduct closely.
Members have the responsibility of reporting any violation of this code, or misconduct not covered on it, that they experience or detect.
Members will not discriminate against others because of sex, creed, religion, race, color, national origin, economic status, cultural mores, or organizational affiliation.
Members have a professional responsibly to serve the public interest and welfare and to further knowledge of science and related disciplines.
Members would actively be concerned with the health and welfare of co-workers, consumer, and the community.
Public comments on scientific, engineering, mathematical, philosophical, historical, and other matters would be made with care and precision, without unsubstantiated, exaggerated, or premature statements.
At all times, behave in a way that upholds the canonical values and the integrity and good reputation of the canonical endeavor.
Authorship would be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, and interpretation of the research study.
Scientists, engineers, historians, mathematicians, philosophers, and others would offer all those who have made significant contributions the opportunity to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study would be acknowledged, but not identified as authors.
Scientists, engineers, historians, mathematicians, philosophers, and others would ensure their contributions, and those of the collaborators, are thorough, accurate, and an unbiased in design, implementation, and presentation.
Members would promote and protect the legitimate interests of their employers, perform work honestly and competently, fulfill obligations, and safeguard proprietary information.
Members, as employers, would treat employees and subordinates with respect for their professionalism and concern for their well-being, and provide them with a safe, congenial working environment, fair compensation, and proper acknowledgment of their contributions to the canonical endeavor.
Members would regard the tutelage of students as a trust conferred by society for the promotion of the student's learning and professional development. Each student would be treated respectfully and without exploitation.
Members would treat associates with respect, regardless of the level of their formal education, encourage them, learn with them, share ideas honestly, and give credit for their contributions.
Members would serve clients faithfully and incorruptibly, respect confidentiality, advise honestly, and charge fairly.
Members would acknowledge their sponsors publicly and provide them with a fair statement of how they have utilized any resources provided.
Members would understand and anticipate the environmental consequences of their work.
Members have responsibility to avoid pollution and to protect the environment. They will use their knowledge, skills, and training when appropriate to find ways to harmonize man's needs, demands, and actions with the maintenance and enhancement of natural and managed ecosystems.
Scientists, engineers, mathematicians, historians, and philosophers would seek to advance canonical science and related disciplines, understand the limitations of their knowledge, and respect the truth.
The results of research and laboratory records would be accurate and complete, and maintained in a form that allows analysis and review.
Scientists, engineers, mathematicians, historians, and philosophers would remain current with developments in their field, share ideas and information, maintain integrity in all conduct and publications, and give due credit to the contributions of others.
Members will clearly differentiate facts, opinions, theories, hypotheses, ideas, and conjectures.
Conflicts of interest and research misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism of data are incompatible with this code of conduct.
It would be recognized that honest error is an integral part of the scientific enterprise. To be wrong is ethical, if author promptly acknowledge and correct errors when these are detected.
Permanent review of canonical research work –offering thorough, fair, and objective evaluations based on requisite expertise– provides advice concerning research proposals, the publication of research results and career advancement of colleagues. It is an essential component of the canonical endeavor.
Anonymous review process is not admitted but the identity of referees may be hidden to public when considered. Although review can be difficult and time-consuming, members have a tacit obligation to participate in the process. Further, it is the obligation of each author to provide prompt retractions of corrections of errors in the own published works.
An allegation or complaint involving possible misconduct would be brought to the attention of the Center's staff, which to carry out an initial inquiry to determine the credibility of the allegation.
The Center's staff will expect that all involved parties will cooperate fully by answering questions and/or providing any materials necessary to conduct the inquiry.
The Center's staff will keep copies of all correspondence and documents involved during the inquiry in a confidential file. Confidentiality is desirable during the inquiry in order to protect the rights of all parties and will be maintained to the maximum extent feasible.
(2005 – 2008) some rights reserved
