SCP by Series
SCP Tales by Series
SCP Library
Discover Content
SCP Community
User Resources
Based on The treatment of Class-D Personnel and various humanoid/sentient SCPs such as 590 and 105, I am curious if the foundation has some sort of ethical committee or some kind of moral or ethical code to keep them in check.
…
Ask again later.
…
Reply hazy, concentrate and ask again.
…
No.
We do have a moral and ethical code. To protect mankind.
Admin, SCP Wiki
And to do anything needed to do that, yeah?
Simple enough. Two lines.
With D-class personnel the issue is that they're all by-and-large incorrigible villains who would be executed/incarcerated for life by their governments anyways, so the logic seems, "why not let them help mankind to understand how to protect itself?"
The best evidence for a moral code might be the fate of Guest Researcher Dr. W (during termination tests for SCP-682). Introducing kids to that SCP was clearly sadistic, and him meeting that same fate might show some limits on where research is allowed to go.
More like "we saved them, so their lives belong to us. They're already dead."
Yes, the SCP Foundation has an ethics committee. Most of their time is spent rubber-stamping whatever comes in and badgering the O5 Council about all the black projects of questionable morality that are being hidden from them. Periodically they'll work up the backbone to actually protest a certain test, at which point they receive a threatening memo from O5-9 and typically all is quiet for a few months.
EDIT: I also like the idea that the amount of red tape that must be waded through for "testing procedures that have a foreseeable result of human mortality" is the primary limiting factor on the Class D consumption rate.
P.S. The Foundation does bad things for good reasons, and it finds itself forced to do bad things quite a lot, but that doesn't mean it can't try to make the best of a bad situation. It's evil if necessary, but not necessarily evil.
Needless to say, it is an entry-level position.
Oh, no, you'd have to work there for decades in order to get the kind of trust necessary to have access to information about Foundation-wide operations.
I imagine it's more like a sinecure.
Well, I actually thought that the researchers conducting the test would send them the vaguest possible details about the experiment, seeing as everybody kinda treats them as a joke.
"Er, Dr. Clef, it says here that your experiment regarding SCP-231, whatever that is, has been known to cause 'extreme moral aversion among even our most hardened researchers.' Eh, the report also contained some mentions of sexual predators, trombones, and bubble bath. The rest is all black out. Should the Committee be concerned about this?"
"Well, if you'd like, you could always send a complaint to the O5."
And of course the complaint would be shot down because XK and whatnot, and eventually everybody working in the Ethics Committee would be taken pity on by some researcher for being so dedicated to the Foundation even though they have such a thankless task and they'd be promoted to an assistant researcher or something.
Right, I'd like to steer you away from the assumption that D-Class are "incorrigible villains", "scum of the earth", or whatever else it is you've got set in your head. Some may be, sure, but D-Class are simply individuals who have been sentenced to death or life in prison. Now, while you generally have to make some mistakes to arrive in such a position, it's also possible for the system which put you in such a situation to be mistaken. How many people on death row, or already put to death, were later acquitted? How many people sentenced to life had their convictions overturned? You think the Foundation double-checks?
Do you believe D-Class are pulled only from the American prison system, or the prison systems of developed countries for that matter? I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few by and large respectable political activists among their ranks, supplied by various unnamed nations, or individuals whose cultures condemn them to death for things ours may view as outlandish1. Do cashiers at gas stations meticulously examine every bill and coin given to them as payment so as to know exactly where it came from, who handled it previously, and the nature of all transactions which it was involved in, or just glance to ensure it's real and accept the money? A bundle of non-sequential, unmarked bills is a tough thing to turn down when you're hard-pressed for cash.
Even among those sentenced by more developed nations with marginally more agreeable justice systems, the charges which lead one to be incorporated into the D-Class program vary wildly. All it takes is for an otherwise respectable person to suffer a momentary lapse in judgment, to get carried away, and they're facing life in prison. Now, I'm not saying there should be no consequences for such things; I absolutely believe there should be. All I'm saying is there's a huge difference between someone who took a drunken bar fight too far and a serial killer.
tl;dr, I don't think the Foundation is terribly picky, but I highly doubt they regard D-Class as simply "bad people who deserve it", and I'd like to advise you against regarding them as such. It's just not that black-and-white.
I think the "plucked from death row" thing is a perfect example of how the Foundation operates: as much in the moral grey areas as possible. They do their best to do what's right, but if it's a choice between mission failure and doing something morally questionable, they'll always choose the latter.
Maybe it would be better for me to characterize them as "incorrigible villains in the eyes of their respective governments" which falls more in line with the official policy that D-class personnel are "condemned persons."
Just wondering, is there any known situation where being a D-class personnel isn't a death sentence (edit: not including D-class personnel who were later categorized as SCPs or turned into actual workers such as SCP-181)? I know there are some situations where D-class personnel may be allowed to live beyond the 1st of the month due to usefulness for SCP containment, but I don't think I've seen a situation where a D-class person has lasted more than maybe a couple months tops.
Oh I wouldn't say that introducing a child to SCP-682 the first time was sadistic, as 682 could very well not want to attack children. Although the second introduction of children probably was sadistic (as it had been proved that children don't stop 682 attacking). Although throwing Dr. W to 682 was probably more of 'Don't waste resources' than 'Stop being immoral.'
There was no reason to try the first child except bad movies, wishful thinking, and probably an inflated sense of "Mad Science because I can!" The second was "I can't be wrong and i can do what I want because I'm not accountable to anyone! And, you know, Mad Science because I can!"
Turns out, they have to at least justify WHY they do things.
Well, when you have a giant lizard that Just Won't Die, considerations of common-sense nature (such as "there is no reason for it not to attack children") kind of go out of the window. At least, I wouldn't bet any of my money on any outcome prior to an experiment.
An admin or mod will tell you this - they would rather you don't use the signature thing. It gets old REALLY quick.
The thing is, you have to use SOME common sense. It's like dropping it out of a plane - after all the rest it's been through, you don't do it because it's stupid and would NEVER EVER work. And even if you're remotely going to try it once, TWICE is just being a dick.
Well, dropping it from an airplane carries more risk. The first attempt at child experimentation was as reasonable as any other attempt at "decommissioning" 682 (though more "evil", of course ;-) ), since the thing is so apparently "paranormal" in its abilities that "allergic to children, for no reason" is as plausible as any other scenario, and was distinctly risk-free (well, not counting the child, of course…)
Not really. 682's gotten free before, and killed a bunch of people. Presumably, at some point, including some children. It's pretty obvious it's not allergic to kids.
Considering 682's nature? That just as easily could read "682 was initially allergic to children. In line with its common string of properties, this allergy mutated into 'distinct enjoyment of taste'."
The next test was "Is it allergic to psychopathic researchers that run random tests for no reason just to see what will happen?"
Turns out it's not allergic to those either.
Whether any important assets were lost during this test is somewhat debatable, but as far as "magical Lamarkian dragon research" goes, feeding it an unlikeable colleague was a perfectly valid test, yes.
Several articles mention scientists getting punished for crossing the line and putting other human beings in unnecessarily dangerous situations. Because 'there is no canon', it really depends on the author.
There IS a line somewhere, it's just a very hazy one that varies depending on the item involved.
here's really how i tend to see it….
the O5 dont give a crap about ethics or morals. theyre pretty much ok with whatever happens.
level 4 staff are in charge of overall sitewide direction and leave minor things like ethics of specific experiments to other personnel
level 3 staff are the ones who get to make moral decisions.
level 2 and level 1 staff are the ones actually working on the objects. level 3 are their managers and security, the ones who get to decide what kinds of experiments are done, and determine whether or not staff overstep their boundaries in conducting them.
thus depending on the moods and personalities of the level 3 staff, one set of SCP objects might have all kinds of horrifying procedures done, while another set might be watched over carefully and any missteps dealt with harshly.
obviously if enough level 3's became critical of another level 3's actions things might be reported and brought under closer scrutiny by the level 4 above them, but the results again would depend upon that level 4's personal style of leadership and morality.
so depending on where in the foundation you happen to be working….you might have all kinds of moral freedom, or next to none.
The idea of a Foundation Ethics Committee makes me laugh. Especially if everyone laughs at them… or, even more in-tone, if being "transferred to the Ethics Committee" is a euphemism for termination.
"How many people did I just kill?"
"How many did you just save? You're a smart man. Do the math. It'll help you sleep."
— Hank McCoy and Steve Rogers, Secret Avengers #16
The Foundation Ethics Committee is often thought of as an ineffectual rubberstamp laughingstock, a bunch of seat-fillers. And they go to quite some lengths to sustain that impression. The Ethics Committee is actually the secret power within the Foundation. The O5s decide what is and is not safe, but the members of the Ethics Committee are the ones who advise the O5s about what is and is not acceptable.
(If it ever occurs to you to wonder who's really in control, the Overseers or the Ethics Committee, then presumably you're smart enough to keep your mouth shut.)
The members of the Ethics Committee do a terrible job - and that's "terrible" as in "terrible swift sword". They are the ones who balance the moral costs of everything the Foundation does — and in order to balance the costs, they must first know the costs. Every detail that gets redacted or expunged or blackboxed, they know it. They know what SCP-447-2 does when it comes in contact with dead bodies. They know what Procedure 110-Montauk is. They should — they designed it.
Remember: the Foundation does not rule the world. The Foundation serves the world. Regardless of what the general population may think it wants, the Foundation's actions are in that general population's best interests.
Remember: the Foundation is not evil. We do not torture people "just because". We are against unnecessary cruelty; the members of the Ethics Committee are the ones who decide when cruelty is necessary. To serve the greater good, you must be able to quantify and compare distinct goods. This is what the Ethics Committee does.
Remember: the 'P' stands for 'Protect'. The Ethics Committee judges what is and is not acceptable, balancing evils so that on the whole, and in the end, evil is minimized.
'I did the right thing, didn't I? It all worked out in the end?"
" 'In the end'? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."
— Adrian Veidt and Jon Osterman, Watchmen #12
If there was irrefutable proof that the only way to save humanity was by eliminating the Foundation, the Ethics Committee would advocate that this be done, and begin implementing plans to make it happen.
"You want happy endings? Fuck you. You're alive to read it."
— black white black white black white black white black white gray
you know, i wish i could upvote this a dozen times. my opinion on level 3 personnel making moral judgments was fairly well thought out, but i completely forgot about one of the most awesome aspects of the foundation….
certain decisions, often cruel or horrifying ones, are put in place by what feels like a higher power within the organization.
is that group the O5? that seems too simple. this….this suddenly makes it all come into focus. this would be the group who gets to decide who lives and dies, who decides who has gone too far or who isnt going far enough…..
when their decisions are made they are implemented without people being told under whose authority the actions are being done, simply knowing that it's coming from people "higher up" in the foundation. the ethics committee goes largely unnoticed, even though they are the ones to actually fear.
great stuff
Voct, this is probably my favorite interpretation of any sort of Foundation "Ethics Committee". Excellent.
seriously. voct, remove or alter the references, expand and refine this a little, and then post it as its own page. this deserves more visibility.
This. Do it. Do it now.
SCP Wiki Administrator | Earth: We're all in this together.
Thirding this.
Piffy is an SCP Foundation Moderator, Lv. 9001 Squishy Wizard, and Knight of the Red Pen.
Do it Voct, i so command.
Admin, SCP Wiki
