David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
NanoEthics 1 (3):223-237 (2007)
The purpose of the present paper is: (1) to outline a conceptual framework useful for the analysis of ethical issues raised by goal-directed activities, (2) to apply this framework to nanoscale research, (3) identify some of the main challenges in the evaluation of such research, and (4) exemplify what is needed for a positive answer to the question “How can nanoscale research improve the quality of life?” A basic idea of the paper is that nanoscale research can improve the conditions and quality of life of large groups in society, provided that: (a) this research is directed at certain generally accepted goals, (b) at least some of the opportunities are exploited for the good of mankind, (c) the key obstacles on the road are eliminated, reduced or circumvented, and (d) this is done in ethically acceptable ways.
|Keywords||Evaluation Ethics Challenges Nanoscale research Conceptual framework|
|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
Tom L. Beauchamp (2009). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Alan Gewirth (1978). Reason and Morality. University of Chicago Press.
Alan Gewirth (1999). [Book Review] the Community of Rights. [REVIEW] Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (2):361-375.
Deryck Beyleveld (1991). The Dialectical Necessity of Morality: An Analysis and Defense of Alan Gewirth's Argument to the Principle of Generic Consistency. University of Chicago Press.
Peter Singer (ed.) (1991). A Companion to Ethics. Blackwell Reference.
Citations of this work BETA
Céline Kermisch (2012). Do New Ethical Issues Arise at Each Stage of Nanotechnological Development? NanoEthics 6 (1):29-37.
Doris Schroeder, Sally Dalton-Brown, Benjamin Schrempf & David M. Kaplan (forthcoming). Responsible, Inclusive Innovation and the Nano-Divide. NanoEthics:1-12.
Similar books and articles
Margaret McNeil & Kerry Pedigo (2001). Western Australian Managers Tell Their Stories: Ethical Challenges in International Business Operations. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 30 (4):305 - 317.
Ray Fitzpatrick (1999). Principles and Problems in the Assessment of Quality of Life in Health Care. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (1):37-46.
Vivien Runnels, Elizabeth Hay, Elyse Sevigny & Paddi O’Hara (2009). The Ethics of Conducting Community-Engaged Homelessness Research. Journal of Academic Ethics 7 (1-2):57-68.
Sara Svensson & Sven Ove Hansson (2007). Protecting People in Research: A Comparison Between Biomedical and Traffic Research. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):99-115.
Andrzej Górski (2006). The Responsible Conduct of Basic and Clinical Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):3-4.
Bjørn Hofmann, Anne Myhr & Søren Holm (2013). Scientific Dishonesty—a Nationwide Survey of Doctoral Students in Norway. BMC Medical Ethics 14 (1):1-9.
Felice J. Levine & Joyce M. Iutcovich (2003). Challenges in Studying the Effects of Scientific Societies on Research Integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):257-268.
Kenneth V. Iserson (2007). Has Emergency Medicine Research Benefited Patients? An Ethical Question. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (3):289-295.
Aldrin E. Sweeney (2006). Social and Ethical Dimensions of Nanoscale Science and Engineering Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):435-464.
Joachim Schummer (2004). Interdisciplinary Issues in Nanoscale Research. In Baird D. (ed.), Discovering the Nanoscale. Ios 9--20.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #255,754 of 1,907,073 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #345,104 of 1,907,073 )
How can I increase my downloads?