Synthetic Biology: Seeking for Orientation in the Absence of Valid Prospective Knowledge and of Common Values

Logic, Argumentation and Reasoning

Volumn 10, Issue , 2016, Pages 325-344

  Grunwald, Armin ^a  

^a KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Consequentialist approach; Hermeneutic orientation; Prospective knowledge; Synthetic biology; Visionary narratives

Indexed keywords

EID: 85013467955     PISSN: 22149120     EISSN: 22149139     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_14     Document Type: Chapter

References (45)

1. Ball, P. (2005). Synthetic biology for nanotechnology. Nanotechnology, 16, R1–R8.
2. Bechmann, G. (1993). Ethische Grenzen der Technik oder technische Grenzen der Ethik? In Studiengesellschaft für Zeitgeschichte und politische Bildung (Ed.), Geschichte und Gegenwart. Vierteljahreshefte f€ur Zeitgeschichte, Gesellschaftsanalyse und politische Bildung (12th ed., pp. 213–225). Graz: Studiengesellschaft für Zeitgeschichte und politische Bildung.
3. Betz, G. (2016). Accounting for possibilities in decision making. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 135–169). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_6.
4. Boldt, J., & Müller, O. (2008). Newtons of the leaves of grass. Nat Biotechnol, 26, 387–389.
5. Brun, G., & Betz, G. (2016). Analysing practical argumentation. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 39–77). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_3.
6. COGEM (2006). Synthetische biologie. Een onderzoeksveld met voortschrijdende gevolgen. COGEM signalering CGM/060228-03. See: www.cogem.net/index.cfm/nl/publicaties/ publicatie/synthetische-biologie-een-onderzoeksveld-met-voortschrijdende-gevolgen. Accessed 3 May 2015.
7. Dabrock, P. (2009). Playing God? Synthetic biology as a theological and ethical challenge. Syst Synth Biol, 3, 47–54.
8. de Vriend, H. (2006). Constructing life. Early social reflections on the emerging field of synthetic biology. The Hague: Rathenau Institute.
9. Dupuy, J.-P., & Grinbaum, A. (2004). Living with uncertainty: Toward the ongoing normative assessment of nanotechnology. In J. Schummer & D. Baird (Eds.), Nanotechnology challenges: Implications for philosophy, ethics and society (pp. 287–314). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
10. ETC – The Et-cetera Group (2007). Extreme genetic engineering. An introduction to synthetic biology. http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/publication/602/01/synbioreportweb. pdf. Accessed 3 May 2015.
11. Grinbaum, A., & Groves, C. (2013). What is ‘responsible’ about responsible innovation? In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 119–142). West Sussex: Wiley.
12. Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2016). Framing. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 189–215). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_8.
13. Grunwald, A. (2007). Converging technologies: Visions, increased contingencies of the Conditio Humana, and search for orientation. Futures, 39, 380–392.
14. Grunwald, A. (2009a). Technology assessment: Concepts and methods. In A. Meijers (Ed.), Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences (Vol. 9, pp. 1103–1146). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
15. Grunwald, A. (2009b). Vision assessment supporting the governance of knowledge – The case of futuristic nanotechnology. In G. Bechmann, V. Gorokhov, & N. Stehr (Eds.), The social integration of science. Institutional and epistemological aspects of the transformation of knowledge in modern society (pp. 147–170). Berlin: Edition Sigma.
16. Grunwald, A. (2010). From speculative nanoethics to explorative philosophy of nanotechnology. NanoEthics, 4, 91–101.
17. Grunwald, A. (2012). Responsible nanobiotechnology. Philosophy and ethics. Singapore: Pan Stanford Publishing.
18. Grunwald, A. (2013). Modes of orientation provided by futures studies: Making sense of diversity and divergence. European Journal of Futures Studies, 15, 30. doi:10.1007/s40309-013-0030-5.
19. Grunwald, A. (2014a). Synthetic biology as technoscience and the EEE concept of responsibility. In B. Giese, C. Pade, H. Wigger, & A. von Gleich (Eds.), Synthetic biology. Character and impact (pp. 249–266). Heidelberg: Springer.
20. Grunwald, A. (2014b). The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1, 274–291.
21. Hansson, S. O. (1996). Decision-making under great uncertainty. Philos Soc Sci, 26, 369–386.
22. Hansson, S. O. (2006). Great uncertainty about small things. In J. Schummer & D. Baird (Eds.), Nanotechnology challenges – Implications for philosophy, ethics and society (pp. 315–325). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
23. Hansson, S. O. (2016). Evaluating the uncertainties. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 79–104). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_4.
24. Hansson, S. O., & Hirsch Hadorn, G. (2016). Introducing the argumentative turn in policy analysis. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 11–35). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_2.
25. Heinrichs, D., Krellenberg, K., Hansjürgens, B., & Martínez, F. (Eds.). (2012). Risk habitat megacity. Heidelberg: Springer.
26. Ilulissat Statement. (2007). Synthesizing the future. A vision for the convergence of synthetic biology and nanotechnology. See: https://www.research.cornell.edu/KIC/images/pdfs/ilulissat_statement.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2015.
27. Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. German version: Jonas, Hans. 1979. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik f€ur die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
28. M€oller, N. (2016). Value uncertainty. In S. O. Hansson & G. Hirsch Hadorn (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis. Reasoning about uncertainty (pp. 105–133). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_5.
29. Nordmann, A. (2007). If and then: A critique of speculative NanoEthics. Nanoethics, 1, 31–46.
30. Nordmann, A. (2014). Responsible innovation, the art and craft of future anticipation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1, 87–98.
31. Nordmann, A. (2004). Converging technologies – Shaping the future of European societies. European Commission. See www.ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/ntw-report-alfred-nordmann_en.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2015.
32. Nordmann, A., & Rip, A. (2009). Mind the gap revisited. Nat Nanotechnol, 4, 273–274.
33. Pade, C., Giese, B., Koenigstein, S., Wigger, H., & von Gleich, A. (2014). Characterizing synthetic biology through its novel and enhanced functionalities. In B. Giese, C. Pade, H. Wigger, & A. von Gleich (Eds.), Synthetic biology. Character and impact (pp. 71–104). Heidelberg: Springer.
34. Paslack, R., Ach, J., Lüttenberg, B., & Weltring, K.-M. (Eds.). (2012). Proceed with caution. Concept and application of the precautionary principle in nanobiotechnology. Münster: LIT.
35. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2010). New directions: The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies. See www.bioethics.gov/synthetic-biology-report. Accessed 3 May 2015.
36. Rescher, N. (1983). Risk. A philosophical introduction to the theory of risk evaluation and management. Lanham: University Press of America.
37. Schmid, G., Ernst, H., Grünwald, W., Grunwald, A., et al. (2006). Nanotechnology – Perspectives and assessment. Berlin: Springer.
38. Selin, C. (2008). The sociology of the future: Tracing stories of technology and time. Sociology Compass, 2, 1878–1895.
39. Shrader-Frechette, K. S. (1991). Risk and rationality. Philosophical foundations for populist reforms. Berkeley: University of California Press.
40. Synbiology (2005). SYNBIOLOGY – an analysis of synthetic biology research in Europe and North America. http://www2.spi.pt/synbiology/documents/SYNBIOLOGY_Literature_And_ Statistical_Review.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2015.
41. Synth-Ethics (2011). Homepage of the EU-funded project ethical and regulatory issues raised by synthetic biology. http://synthethics.eu/. Accessed 3 May 2015.
42. Synthetic Biology Institute (2015). What is synthetic biology? See www.synbio.berkeley.edu/ index.php?page¼about-us. Accessed 3 May 2015.
43. von Gleich, A., Pade, C., Petschow, U., & Pissarskoi, E. (2007). Bionik. Aktuelle Trends und zuk€unftige Potentiale. Berlin: Universität Bremen.
44. Wagner, P. (2005). Nanobiotechnology. In R. Greco, F. B. Prinz, & R. Lane Smith (Eds.), Nanoscale technology in biological systems (pp. 39–55). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
45. Wiedemann, P., & Schütz, H. (Eds.). (2008). The role of evidence in risk characterization. Weinheim: WILEY-VCH Verlag.