What Counts as “Success” in Speculative and Anticipatory Ethics? Lessons from the Advent of Germline Gene Editing

Ethical, Legal and Social Implications of Emerging Technology (ELSIET) Symposium

“…Socio-technical scenario approaches are similar to the techno-ethical approach outlined above; however, according to Schick ( 2019 ), they owe their origins to utopian studies and traditional philosophical thought experimentation (261). Claiming they are now used “as a form of moral foresight; an attempt to keep the ethical discourse ahead of the technological curve,” Schick ( 2019 ) suggests the goal of socio-technical speculation is to “guide society toward morally sound decisions regarding emerging technologies” (261). Thus, the scenarios being discussed are deeply embedded in hypothetical future societies.…”

“…Anticipatory ethical systems are also subject to criticisms, including that because they speculate on future technologies they might waste time conducting analyses on things that never come to pass. Schick ( 2019 ) also claims it is often unclear what constitutes success in anticipatory ethics, as the goal of settling all ethical concerns and establishing appropriate regulatory systems before a technology is released may be unrealistic (265). Further, in their attempt to pre-empt future applications of new technologies, Schick ( 2019 ) claims speculative ethical models may miss crucial stages in the process, as demonstrated by the example of genetic engineering: the mainstream bioethics discourse on human genetic engineering (i.e.…”

“…Schick ( 2019 ) also claims it is often unclear what constitutes success in anticipatory ethics, as the goal of settling all ethical concerns and establishing appropriate regulatory systems before a technology is released may be unrealistic (265). Further, in their attempt to pre-empt future applications of new technologies, Schick ( 2019 ) claims speculative ethical models may miss crucial stages in the process, as demonstrated by the example of genetic engineering: the mainstream bioethics discourse on human genetic engineering (i.e. primarily in the US and the UK) was not indexed to the current state of science or slightly ahead of it, but instead took up questions entangled with more distant anticipated future developments.…”

“…Once human embryonic gene editing became possible, Schick ( 2019 ) claims “the newly urgent question of whether germline interventions were ethically permissible was no longer where the discussion was centered” as speculations regarding human enhancement had started to dominant bioethical debate on the subject (264). Schick ( 2019 ) continues: “[i]n retrospect, it seems almost inevitable that once germline engineering was accomplished, the ‘old’ question of whether it should be undertaken at all would suddenly become obsolete” (264). Thus, there is a risk that by focusing too much on future applications, ethicists will miss the opportunity to intervene in foundational stages of technological revolution.…”

“…In effect, the forwardlooking discourse subjected them to what might be called "anticipatory obsolescence" by asking whether to maintain a distinction between somatic and germline therapies-long before there was a technique up to the task of altering the genome of a human embryo with sufficient efficacy to begin considering preclinical human embryonic interventions. ( 264) Once human embryonic gene editing became possible, Schick (2019) claims "the newly urgent question of whether germline interventions were ethically permissible was no longer where the discussion was centered" as speculations regarding human enhancement had started to dominant bioethical debate on the subject (264). Schick (2019) continues: "[i]n retrospect, it seems almost inevitable that once germline engineering was accomplished, the 'old' question of whether it should be undertaken at all would suddenly become obsolete" (264).…”