Science routinely appeals to the idea of serving the common good, at least in part to justify public funding. Yet, there is growing recognition that current research structures and incentives impede the fulfilment of this ideal. This paper argues that this shortfall stems from the dominance of liberal conceptions of the common good, which position science as an external and instrumental service provider whose worth lies in producing measurable outcomes. Examples from synthetic biology show how s…
Read moreScience routinely appeals to the idea of serving the common good, at least in part to justify public funding. Yet, there is growing recognition that current research structures and incentives impede the fulfilment of this ideal. This paper argues that this shortfall stems from the dominance of liberal conceptions of the common good, which position science as an external and instrumental service provider whose worth lies in producing measurable outcomes. Examples from synthetic biology show how such conceptions make science vulnerable to vested interests, reinforce its commodification and corrode the collaborative relationships on which scientific practice depends. We propose instead a network conception that regards science as internal to, and constitutive of, the common good. Drawing on the Aristotelian tradition, this view holds that the common good in science is generated through the relationships, practices, and values that enable communities to flourish together. Using research case examples, we illustrate how the network conception of the common good can guide science away from an outcome-driven orientation towards one grounded in community ideals. We conclude that reimagining science as a relational practice offers a more generative path toward reforming research culture, governance, and evaluation in service of human flourishing.
