This reflective essay is inspired by a roundtable discussion at the World Science Forum on the question ‘Are there ethical limits to what science can achieve and should pursue?’ I argue that, amid the conflicting trends of ‘technological utopianism’—extreme faith in technological solutions; and ‘post-truth’ politics—the populist pushback against the universality of science, the conditions for ethical knowledge production are significantly challenged. Drawing on insights gleaned from my work on political violence, law, and technology, I point to historical continuities in the way the application and pursuit of science relates to violence—especially state violence. Conscious of the fact that science exercises no restraint on violence—and indeed, may be put to work for violent purposes—the paper calls for more attention to the social, structural, and political conditions of scientific production. The final part of this essay, therefore, examines three developments challenging the ethical capacity of scholars and scientists today. These are (1) the bureaucratization of ethics (2), ‘ethics washing,’ and (3) co-optation. Like other policy domains in our society, informed normative assessments around scientific pursuits—value judgments and ethical evaluation—ought to be based on sound empirical knowledge of the contingencies of science.

这篇反思性文章的灵感来自世界科学论坛上关于“科学可以实现和应该追求的东西是否存在道德限制？”问题的圆桌讨论。我认为，在“技术乌托邦主义”的冲突趋势中——对技术解决方案的极端信仰；和“后真相”政治——民粹主义对科学普遍性的反击，道德知识生产的条件受到重大挑战。利用从我在政治暴力、法律和技术方面的工作中收集到的见解，我指出了科学的应用和追求与暴力——尤其是国家暴力相关的方式的历史连续性。意识到科学对暴力没有限制——事实上，可能会为暴力目的而工作——这篇论文呼吁更多地关注社会、结构、和科学生产的政治条件。因此，本文的最后部分考察了挑战当今学者和科学家的道德能力的三个发展。它们是（1）伦理的官僚化（2）、“伦理清洗”和（3）吸纳。与我们社会中的其他政策领域一样，围绕科学追求（价值判断和伦理评估）的知情规范性评估应该基于对科学偶然性的可靠经验知识。