Skip to main content
Log in

Making Life: A Comment on ‘Playing God in Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Synthetic Biology and the Meaning of Life’ by Henk van den Belt (2009)

  • Critical Discussion Notes
  • Published:
NanoEthics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

“Van den Belt recently examined the notion that synthetic biology and the creation of ‘artificial’ organisms are examples of scientists ‘playing God’. Here I respond to some of the issues he raises, including some of his comments on my previous discussions of the value of the term ‘life’ as a scientific concept.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Van den Belt H (2009) Playing God in Frankenstein’s footsteps: synthetic biology and the meaning of life. Nanoethics 3:257–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ball P (2007) ‘What is life? A silly question’ June 26, 2007. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007_06_01_archive.html

  3. Turney J (1998) Frankenstein’s footsteps: science, genetics, and popular culture. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  4. Peters T (2002) Playing God? Genetic determinism and human freedom, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  5. Scholem GG (1965) On the Kabbalah and its symbolism. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, p 166

    Google Scholar 

  6. Newman WR (2004) Promethean ambitions: alchemy and the quest to perfect nature. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 192–193

    Google Scholar 

  7. Virgil C (1959) Virgil’s Georgics: a modern English verse translation, tr. Bovie S P. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  8. Benyus JM (2002) Biomimicry. Harper, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Forbes P (2006) The Gecko’s foot. W. W Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Murphy M (2008) ‘The natural law tradition in ethics’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-ethics/

  11. Bensaude-Vincent B, Newman WR (eds) (2007) The artificial and the natural: an evolving polarity. MIT, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  12. Haldane JBS (1923) Daedalus, or science and the future. Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  13. Edwards R, Steptoe P (1980) A matter of life. Hutchinson & Co, London

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nature (2007) Editorial: meanings of ‘life’: synthetic biology provides a welcome antidote to chronic vitalism. Nature 447:1031–1032

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cho MK, Magnus D, Caplan AL, McGee D, The Ethics of Genomics Group (1999) Ethical considerations in synthesizing a minimal genome. Science 286:2087–2090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Skloot R (2010) The immortal life of Henrietta Lacks. Crown, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Report of the committee of inquiry into human fertilisation and embryology (1984). HM Stationary Office, London

  18. Mulkay M (1997) The embryo research debate. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Silver LM (1997) Remaking Eden. HarperCollins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nature (1987) IVF remains in legal limbo. Nature 327:87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ball P (in press, 2011) Unnatural. Bodley Head, London

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip Ball.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ball, P. Making Life: A Comment on ‘Playing God in Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Synthetic Biology and the Meaning of Life’ by Henk van den Belt (2009). Nanoethics 4, 129–132 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-010-0091-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-010-0091-x

Keywords

Navigation