Introduction

Integrity is the essence of credible, reliable and ethical conduct.

There is no such thing as having a little bit of integrity. You are a person of integrity or you are not a person of integrity (Ien Dales, 1931 – 1994).

By the way, there is also no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

Is differentiating between scientific integrity, personal integrity, governance/administrative integrity etc. relevant?

Scientific conduct

Bearing in mind the words of Ien Dales, differentiating between scientific integrity, governance/administrative integrity, personal integrity etc. is capricious and arbitrary.

For instance to try and protect someone after his administrative misconduct by suggesting that his personal integrity was not sat stake, is a historical example of inconsistency: integrity is generic, not specific.

There is no difference between scientific integrity, personal integrity, governance/administrative integrity and so on : you can for instance be a scientist without being a person of integrity. What matters is your scientific conduct.

Science is a strategic process conducted scientifically. Science is to try and reach a better understanding of reality. First there is an issue, then there is science (see posts 37and 42).

Conclusion

Scientific integrity is not relevant because the concepts of scientific and integrity are not compatible: you can be a little bit scientific, but you can’t have a little bit of integrity.