<<For example, one of the basic ethical beliefs in "science' is that the subject/ participant has the right to not be "harmed". Up until the mid-1900's the belief was that this meant "physically" harmed (prior to this it was only what the researcher percieved as harmful, even if the subject stated it was harmful, the research may not have). Currently, it means anything that causes the individual to feel uncomfortable be it "physical", "psychological", or "emotional". It has changed over time. Will it be the same in 50 years? Who knows...>>

See, this is the point I'm trying to pick apart. You're looking at the apperances of the belief. The whole purpose of the belief was to not harm the subject, and well, once we realized that people can be harmed emotionally and psychologically as well as physcially, the scientists saw that they shouldn't harm them. So the belief modified itself, but it's still the same thing. I call any piece of furniture that has a back and cushions a sofa. Does it matter if it's a lounger, or a chair, or a love seat? Not really. It's still comfy to sit on (or not... stupid common area cheap furniture.)
That's what I'm trying to get at, and once I"m there, I've got another place to go.