Is it all about human nature? Ethical challenges of converging technologies beyond a polarized debate

Ferrari, Arianna

doi:10.1080/13511610802002171

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For Dupuy, the risk (and it is an existential risk to humanity) is captured in the notion of the rebellion of technoscience against the human condition. Technoscience here is science that is oriented towards fabrication of tools and devices, were transforming and knowing are intertwined rather than as in classical science were observing and understanding nature is the focus [61]. For Dupuy, the question is not if we should change and expand human characteristics (for instance in terms of developing/aspiring to human enhancements) and what that might mean for human concepts of ourselves, but what it means to be human in the sense of the human condition, that is what it means for us to be human and whether new technologies may change this.…”

Section: Nanotechnology and Metaphysical Aspects Of Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a nanorisk appraisal framework

Senjen¹,

Hansen²

2011

Comptes Rendus. Physique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper discusses in the context of nanotechnology whether current concepts of chemical risk assessment can be used to assess nanorisk. Nanorisk can be defined from the narrow (eco) toxicological perspective to the broader sense to include societal/cultural impacts or even to the fundamental philosophical level i.e. questioning societies need for the technology. We outline here the limitations of chemical risk assessment and other recent proposed risk governance paradigms in relation to nanotechnology and nanomaterials, including, its inability to include societal risks (ownership, privacy, security, nanodivide 1 , convergence of nano-, bio-, etc.) and metaphysical risk (including the lay persons perspective on the risks of nanotechnology). Finally, we outline the fundamental principles and criteria that an alternative comprehensive framework should be based on. Keywords: nanotechnology, nanomaterials, risk appraisal framework, types of knowledge, types of risk, metaphysical risk Résumé Ce papier est une discussion sur la viabilité des concepts habituellement utilisés dans le cadre du risque chimique, lorsqu'il s'agit d'évaluer les « nanorisques ». Le nanorisque peut être défini suivant des perspectives variées de celle, restreinte, du risque eco-toxicologique à celle plus large de l'impact sociétal ou culturel, voire même sous l'angle plus philosophique du questionnement de la pertinence du besoin en technologies de la société. Nous résumerons les limitations des évaluations du type "risque chimique" et de celles d'autres schémas de gouvernance récemment proposés en relation avec les nanotechnologies ou les nanomatériaux, en particulier leur incapacité à prendre en compte le risque « sociétal » (propriété de technologies, vie privée, sécurité, « nanodivide » 2 , convergence nano-bio, etc ..) et le risque « métaphysique » (notamment l'avis du profane sur ces risques). Finalement, nous définirons les principes fondamentaux et les critères sur lesquels un cadre prenant en compte l'ensemble de ces questions devrait être fondé.

show abstract

Section: Nanotechnology and Metaphysical Aspects Of Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a nanorisk appraisal framework

Senjen¹,

Hansen²

2011

Comptes Rendus. Physique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…'Risk' is also understood as encompassing problems connected both to the dual use of technologies (such as therapeutic/non-therapeutic uses and peaceful or military uses) and to distributive justice. One, heavily disputed, example is provided by the debate on human enhancement, which takes the form of a struggle between a libertarian/consequentialist approach and a conservative/deontological one [53]. The work of Harris [76,77] and of Bostrom [15], for example, is a clear case of an explicit use of a consequentialist framework.…”

Section: Nanoethical Reflection As a Narrow Form Of Risk Assessment: mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…[76]). Thus both consequentialist defenders of enhancement and their deontological opponents centre what is at stake around the question of the legitimacy of changing human nature [53]-around, in other words, the question of whether we can accept technological 20 Hull [80] distinguishes three kinds of critique of the precautionary principle: the claim that the principle is not scientific; that it ignores the risks of regulation; and that people make irrational decisions. 21 Sunstein [156] argues, for example, that the principle is incoherent "not because it leads in bad directions, but because read for all its worth, it leads in no direction at all.…”

Section: Nanoethical Reflection As a Narrow Form Of Risk Assessment: mentioning

confidence: 99%

Developments in the Debate on Nanoethics: Traditional Approaches and the Need for New Kinds of Analysis

Ferrari¹

2010

Nanoethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to review different discourses within the emerging field of ethical reflection on nanotechnology. I will start by analysing the early stages of this debate, showing how it has been focused on searching for legitimacy for this sphere of moral inquiry. I will then characterise an ethical approach, common to many authors, which frames ethical issues in terms of risks and benefits. This approach identifies normative issues where there are conflicts of interest or where challenges to the fundamental values of our society arise. In response to the limitations of this approach, other commentators have called for more profound analysis of the limits of our knowledge, and have appealed to values, such as sustainability or responsibility, which should, they suggest, inform nanotechnological development (I will define this approach as a "sophisticated form of prudence"). After showing the ways in which these frameworks are limited, I will examine more recent developments in debates on nanoethics which call for the contextualisation of ethical discourse in its ontological, epistemic and socio-economic and political reflections. Such contextualisation thus involves inquiry into the 'metaphysical research program' (MRP) of nanotechnology/ies and analysis of the socio-economic, political and historical reality of nano. These ideas offer genuinely new insights into the kind of approach required for nanoethical reflection: they recover a sense of the present alongside the need to engage with the past, while avoiding speculation on the future.

show abstract

“…An example is the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), together with European Research Area Networks fund joint transnational projects on Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects (ELSA) of Neuroscience ( https://www.neuron-eranet.eu ). In China, there is an ongoing project [ 48 ] aiming at evaluating ethical issues related to the convergence of nanotechnology, biomedicine, information technology, and cognitive science (NBIC) [ 37 ] to ameliorate human capabilities [ 10 , 47 ]. The ethical issues of this project are especially relevant for cognitive neuroscience research following the launch of the China Brain Project [ 32 ], which has clear priority objectives for integrating an ethical framework, addressing relevant ethical concerns, and planning for solutions [ 32 ].…”

Section: The Pitfalls Of International Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opportunities, risks and challenges in global mental health and population neuroscience: a case of Sino-German cooperation

Liu

Müller

Dolan

et al. 2020

Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large scale prospective cohorts have now been established across several countries, and continents, and among the aims include an assessment of the developmental trajectory of mental disorders. This level of international cooperation helps transfer research findings to new social contexts as well as enabling an assessment of which findings can be replicated, and which interventions are most effective, in different social and cultural settings. However, data sharing across different regional and national health care systems requires a careful consideration of different standards in ethical research, data protection and patient care, including respect for patients' rights, in cooperating jurisdictions. In our review, we discuss ethical, legal and practical challenges associated with such cooperation with a focus on research participants, specifically patient recruitment, by considering the instance of China and Germany. Our broader aim is to promote international cooperation by identifying key challenges that arise in international cooperation, and to facilitate an exchange in relation to legal and practical approaches.

show abstract

Is it all about human nature? Ethical challenges of converging technologies beyond a polarized debate

Cited by 13 publications

References 35 publications

Towards a nanorisk appraisal framework

Towards a nanorisk appraisal framework

Developments in the Debate on Nanoethics: Traditional Approaches and the Need for New Kinds of Analysis

Opportunities, risks and challenges in global mental health and population neuroscience: a case of Sino-German cooperation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About