David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
NanoEthics 1 (2):77-87 (2007)
Far-reaching promises made by nanotechnology have raised the question of whether we are on the way to understanding human beings more and more as belonging to the realm of technology. In this paper, an increasing need to understand the technological re-conceptualization of human beings is diagnosed whenever increasingly “technical” interpretations of humans as mechanical entities are disseminated. And this can be observed at present in the framework of nanobiotechnology, a foremost “technical” self-description where a technical language is adopted. The arena in which the decision is made on increasing the use of technological understanding to define mankind will not be found in the surgery room in which one works with implants, nor the NBIC-laboratory, in which “nerve plugs” are supposed to be developed. The thesis of this paper is that such arena is rather related to the manner in which concepts of humanity are associated with it, how we think and talk about ourselves, and which consequences we draw out of it.
|Keywords||Nanotechnology Human beings Technology|
|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
Armin Grunwald (2010). From Speculative Nanoethics to Explorative Philosophy of Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 4 (2):91-101.
Franc Mali, Toni Pustovrh, Blanka Groboljsek & Christopher Coenen (2012). National Ethics Advisory Bodies in the Emerging Landscape of Responsible Research and Innovation. NanoEthics 6 (3):167-184.
Jean-Pierre Béland, Johane Patenaude, Georges Legault, Patrick Boissy & Monelle Parent (2011). The Social and Ethical Acceptability of NBICs for Purposes of Human Enhancement: Why Does the Debate Remain Mired in Impasse? [REVIEW] NanoEthics 5 (3):295-307.
Jean-Pierre Béland & Johane Patenaude (2013). Risk and the Question of the Acceptability of Human Enhancement: The Humanist and Transhumanist Perspectives. Dialogue 52 (2):377-394.
Stephen H. Cutcliffe, Christine M. Pense & Michael Zvalaren (2012). Framing the Discussion: Nanotechnology and the Social Construction of Technology--What STS Scholars Are Saying. NanoEthics 6 (2):81-99.
Similar books and articles
Rosalyn W. Berne (2004). Towards the Conscientious Development of Ethical Nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (4):627-638.
Kurt Seemann (2003). Basic Principles in Holistic Technology Education. Journal of Technology Education 14 (2):15.
Nick Bostrom (2005). Transhumanist Values. Journal of Philosophical Research 30 (Supplement):3-14.
Andrew Jamison (2009). Can Nanotechnology Be Just? On Nanotechnology and the Emerging Movement for Global Justice. NanoEthics 3 (2):129-136.
Peter-Paul Verbeek (2009). Ambient Intelligence and Persuasive Technology: The Blurring Boundaries Between Human and Technology. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 3 (3):231-242.
Nick Bostrom (2003). Human Genetic Enhancements: A Transhumanist Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (4):493-506.
John R. Dakers (ed.) (2006). Defining Technological Literacy: Towards an Epistemological Framework. Palgrave Macmillan.
Robert E. McGinn (2010). What's Different, Ethically, About Nanotechnology?: Foundational Questions and Answers. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 4 (2):115-128.
D. S. Horner (2005). Anticipating Ethical Challenges: Is There a Coming Era of Nanotechnology? [REVIEW] Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3):127-138.
E. Schuller (2004). Perception of Risk and Nanotechnology. In Baird D. (ed.), Discovering the Nanoscale. Ios
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #147,710 of 1,699,671 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #128,702 of 1,699,671 )
How can I increase my downloads?