Aristotle has opened our eyes, telling us that “All men, by nature, desire to know”. According to this admonishment, we may consider we became conscious about our gnoseological destiny. Beyond the violence that could be obviously deduced, all human history is a continuous progress of knowledge, done by the contribution of science, from its rudimentary forms to the current one, heavily technologized. But science is a human activity and it carry both human being qualities (read virtues), and imperfections (read vices). Science needs inventiveness and on occasion, if not usually, it implies pushing the limits, even the moral ones, beyond acceptable borders. That is the reason that the question in the title makes sense. Thismini-lecture will try to argue that norms are necessary, but seem not to be enough to increase ethical attitude in science and academia. Even the idea that in research a self-regulation is working became inefficient and a preventive attitude would be helpful. Let’s debate about trying to identify solutions how to apply an efficient selection for strong moral characters to enter in research activity. Psychologists, sociologists, moral philosophers, experts in human resources, research policy makers,together with scientists in various areas could find ways for enhancement of morality in research activity by an effective selection without discrimination. Selection on moral criteria, if would be feasible, would be a preventive attitude. Focused debates in the matter are/would be the first step.