8 found

Year:

  1.  2
    Noise and Synthetic Biology: How to Deal with Stochasticity?Miguel Prado Casanova - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):113-122.
    This paper explores the functional role of noise in synthetic biology and its relation to the concept of randomness. Ongoing developments in the field of synthetic biology are pursuing the re-organisation and control of biological components to make functional devices. This paper addresses the distinction between noise and randomness in reference to the functional relationships that each may play in the evolution of living and/or synthetic systems. The differentiation between noise and randomness in its constructive role, that is, between noise (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  9
    The Ethics and Ontology of Synthetic Biology: a Neo-Aristotelian Perspective.Lewis Coyne - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):43-55.
    This article is concerned with two interrelated questions: what, if anything, distinguishes synthetic from natural organisms, and to what extent, if any, creating the former is of moral significance. These are ontological and ethical questions, respectively. As the title indicates, I address both from a broadly neo-Aristotelian perspective, i.e. a teleological philosophy of life and virtue ethics. For brevity’s sake, I shall not argue for either philosophical position at length, but instead hope to demonstrate their legitimacy through their explanatory power. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. BrisSynBio Art-Science Dossier.Maria Fannin, Katy Connor, David Roden & Darian Meacham - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):27-41.
    Finding avenues for collaboration and engagement between the arts and the sciences was a central theme of investigation for the Responsible Research and Innovation and Public Engagement programme at BrisSynBio, a BBSRC/EPSRC Synthetic Biology Research Centre that is now part of the Bristol BioDesign Institute at University of Bristol. The reflections and experiments that appear in this dossier are a sample of these investigations and are contributed by Maria Fannin, Katy Connor and David Roden. Darian Meacham coordinated and introduces the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Philosophy and Synthetic Biology: The BrisSynBio Experiment.Darian Meacham & Miguel Prado Casanova - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):21-25.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  1
    Art-Science Collaboration in an EPSRC/BBSRC-Funded Synthetic Biology UK Research Centre.Michael Reinsborough - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):93-111.
    Here I examine the potential for art-science collaborations to be the basis for deliberative discussions on research agendas and direction. Responsible Research and Innovation has become a science policy goal in synthetic biology and several other high-profile areas of scientific research. While art-science collaborations offer the potential to engage both publics and scientists and thus possess the potential to facilitate the desired “mutual responsiveness” between researchers, institutional actors, publics and various stakeholders, there are potential challenges in effectively implementing collaborations as (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  6
    The Diversity of Engineering in Synthetic Biology.Massimiliano Simons - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):71-91.
    A recurrent theme in the characterization of synthetic biology is the role of engineering. This theme is widespread in the accounts of scholars studying this field and the biologists working in it, in those of the biologists themselves, as well as in policy documents. The aim of this article is to open this black-box of engineering that is supposed to influence and change contemporary life sciences. Too often, both synthetic biologists and their critics assume a very narrow understanding of what (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  1
    Generative Critique in Interdisciplinary Collaborations: From Critique in and of the Neurosciences to Socio-Technical Integration Research as a Practice of Critique in R(R)I.Mareike Smolka - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):1-19.
    Discourses on Responsible Innovation and Responsible Research and Innovation, in short RI, have revolved around but not elaborated on the notion of critique. In this article, generative critique is introduced to RI as a practice that sits in-between adversarial armchair critique and co-opted, uncritical service. How to position oneself and be positioned on this spectrum has puzzled humanities scholars and social scientists who engage in interdisciplinary collaborations with scientists, engineers, and other professionals. Recently, generative critique has been presented as a (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  5
    Living Machines: Metaphors We Live By.Nora S. Vaage - 2020 - NanoEthics 14 (1):57-70.
    Within biology and in society, living creatures have long been described using metaphors of machinery and computation: ‘bioengineering’, ‘genes as code’ or ‘biological chassis’. This paper builds on Lakoff and Johnson’s argument that such language mechanisms shape how we understand the world. I argue that the living machines metaphor builds upon a certain perception of life entailing an idea of radical human control of the living world, looking back at the historical preconditions for this metaphor. I discuss how design is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues