David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):521-533 (2005)
Nanotechnology is a swiftly developing field of technology that is believed to have the potential of great upsides and excessive downsides. In the ethical debate there has been a strong tendency to strongly focus on either the first or the latter. As a consequence ethical assessments of nanotechnology tend to radically diverge. Optimistic visionaries predict truly utopian states of affairs. Pessimistic thinkers present all manner of apocalyptic visions. Whereas the utopian views follow from one-sidedly focusing on the potential benefits of nanotechnology, the apocalyptic perspectives result from giving exclusive attention to possible worst-case scenarios. These radically opposing evaluations hold the risk of conflicts and unwanted backlashes. Furthermore, many of these drastic views are based on simplified and outdated visions of a nanotechnology dominated by self-replicating assemblers and nanomachines. Hence, the present state of the ethical debate on nanotechnology calls for the development of more balanced and better-informed assessments. As a first step in this direction this contribution presents a new method of framing the ethical debate on nanotechnology. Thus, the focus of this paper is on methodology, not on normative analysis.
|Keywords||ethics nanotechnology utopia dystopia|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
James Giordano (2010). The Neuroscience of Pain, and a Neuroethics of Pain Care. Neuroethics 3 (1):89-94.
David J. Bjornstad & Amy K. Wolfe (2011). Adding to the Mix: Integrating ELSI Into a National Nanoscale Science and Technology Center. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):743-760.
Herman T. Tavani (2012). Computer Ethics as a Field of Applied Ethics. Journal of Information Ethics 21 (2):52-70.
Linda F. Hogle (2009). Science, Ethics, and the ÂProblemsâ of Governing Nanotechnologies. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (4):749-758.
Louis Y. Y. Lu, Bruce J. Y. Lin, John S. Liu & Chang-Yung Yu (2012). Ethics in Nanotechnology: What's Being Done? What's Missing? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 109 (4):583-598.
Similar books and articles
Patrick Lin (2006). What's So Special About Nanotechnology and Nanoethics? International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20 (2):179-190.
Kevin C. Elliott (2008). Fritz Allhoff, Patrick Lin, James Moor, and John Weckert (Eds.):Nanoethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Nanotechnology,:Nanoethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Nanotechnology. Philosophy of Science 75 (3):405-408.
Chris Toumey (2011). Seven Religious Reactions to Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 5 (3):251-267.
Armin Grunwald (2010). From Speculative Nanoethics to Explorative Philosophy of Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 4 (2):91-101.
Deborah G. Johnson (2007). Ethics and Technology 'in the Making': An Essay on the Challenge of Nanoethics. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (1):21-30.
Robert E. McGinn (2010). What's Different, Ethically, About Nanotechnology?: Foundational Questions and Answers. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 4 (2):115-128.
Paul Litton (2007). &Quot;nanoethics&Quot;? What's New? Hastings Center Report 37 (1):22-25.
Armin Grunwald (2005). Nanotechnology — a New Field of Ethical Inquiry? Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):187-201.
Fritz Allhoff (2007). On the Autonomy and Justification of Nanoethics. NanoEthics 1 (3):185-210.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #78,580 of 1,140,266 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #142,694 of 1,140,266 )
How can I increase my downloads?