<p>In this invited commentary, I begin by briefly situating my perspective in my own research, which has documented both positive and negative effects of brief, secular mindfulness inductions, and this research shapes my reading of “The Mindful Scientist: How Meditation Could Support Ethical Scientific Practice” by Berryman et al. (2025). I highlight several strengths of the target article, including its thoughtful integration of contemplative traditions with modern scientific ethics, its recognition of motivational and autonomy-related challenges, and its empirically testable mapping between ten “mindful ethical virtues” (e.g., equanimity, harmlessness) and twelve scientific ethical principles (e.g., objectivity, humility, diligence). I also agree with the authors’ emphasis on intention, cultural context, and the need to address broader incentive structures within science. Next, I offer several caveats and counterpoints, such as how not all forms of mindfulness promote ethical action and how there are potential barriers to adoption including concerns about perceived religiosity, feasibility, and unintended consequences. I conclude by identifying open questions and encouraging more empirical work on the processes through which specific mindfulness practices may influence ethical behavior. The proposal by Berryman et al. (2025) is provocative and promising, but its implementation requires careful testing, conceptual precision, and methodological rigor.</p>