How Not to Interpret the Advances of Biotechnology

Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (1):93-102 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

: The authors suggest that it is the indeterminate limits of biotechnology that invite a multiplicity of interpretations of it. They note that incongruent interpretations of biotechnology arise from competing long-term human interests and from competing uses of language. They propose to resolve the opposition between incongruent interpretations by being more precise about what exactly is being debated in the name of biotechnology.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

ISBN(s)

10771999

DOI

10.5840/pcw20051219

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

How Not to Interpret the Advances of Biotechnology.Giridhari L. Pandit - 2005 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (1):93-102.
The three teachings of biotechnology.Mickey Gjerris - 2008 - In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
What can nanotechnology learn from biotechnology?Lawrence Busch & John R. Lloyd - 2008 - In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
Ideology and agricultural technology in the late twentieth century: Biotechnology as symbol and substance. [REVIEW]Frederick H. Buttel - 1993 - Agriculture and Human Values 10 (2):5-15.
Biotechnology and the Animal Issue.Anna S. Olsson & Peter Sandøe - 2004 - Global Bioethics 17 (1):39-49.
The ethics of agri-food biotechnology : how can an agricultural technology be so important?Jeffrey Burkhardt - 2008 - In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
A framework for translating biotechnology experiences to nanotechnology.David Sparling - 2008 - In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
Biotechnology, nanotechnology, media, and public opinion.Susanna Priest - 2008 - In Kenneth H. David & Paul B. Thompson (eds.), What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?: Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience From the Debate Over Agrifood Biotechnology and Gmos. Elsevier/Academic Press.
Biotechnology and the Utilitarian Argument for Patents.Michele Svatos - 1996 - Social Philosophy and Policy 13 (2):113.
Homo biotechnologicus.Emil Višňovský - 2015 - Human Affairs 25 (2):230-237.
Buddhism and Biotechnology.Ron Epstein - unknown
Agricultural biotechnology and the future benefits argument.Jeffrey Burkhardt - 2001 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):135-145.
Ethics & Biotechnology.Anthony Dyson & John Harris - 1994 - Routledge.
Biotechnology is compatible with sustainable agriculture.Donald Duvick - 1995 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8 (2):112-125.
The Saving Power of Biotechnology.Lars Reuter - 2005 - Ethical Perspectives 12 (1):3-16.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-06-04

Downloads
13 (#1,010,467)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references