Global Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Comparison of the Nanoethics Environments of the EU and China

The following article offers a brief overview of current nanotechnology policy, regulation and ethics in Europe and The People??s Republic of China with the intent of noting (dis)similarities in approach, before focusing on the involvement of the public in science and technology policy (i.e. participatory Technology Assessment). The conclusions of this article are, that (a) in terms of nanosafety as expressed through policy and regulation, China PR and the EU have similar approaches towards, and concerns about, nanotoxicity??the official debate on benefits and risks is not markedly different in the two regions; (b) that there is a similar economic drive behind both regions?? approach to nanodevelopment, the difference being the degree of public concern admitted; and (c) participation in decision-making is fundamentally different in the two regions. Thus in China PR, the focus is on the responsibility of the scientist; in the EU, it is about government accountability to the public. The formulation of a Code of Conduct for scientists in both regions (China PR??s predicted for 2012) reveals both similarity and difference in approach to nanotechnology development. This may change, since individual responsibility alone cannot guide S&T development, and as public participation is increasingly seen globally as integral to governmental decision-making.     

Beyond Conversation: Some Lessons for Nanoethics

One of the aims of the DEEPEN project was to deepen ethical understanding of issues related to emerging nanotechnologies through an interdisciplinary approach utilizing insights from philosophy, ethics, and the social sciences. Accordingly, part of its final report was dedicated to the question of what was accomplished with regards to this aim and what further research is required. It relates two insights: Nanotechnologies intensify the ambivalence of ongoing, long-term developments; and yet, our intuitions and received story-lines fail us as a guide to ethical and political matters concerning nanotechnologies.     

纳米伦理:规范分析和范式转换

鉴于纳米技术目前显现出的启发式控制活力,可以将其作为伦理学一个重要的潜在探索领域。这就要求把对纳米技术的规范分析从一般技术制品和后果评估扩大到技术隐喻、想象和语言评估,由此认为目前占据主流地位的德莱克斯勒式纳米机器是一种机械隐喻,必然导向决定论式的单向度社会命运,但其论敌斯默莱的生物模拟隐喻实际上意味着一种范式转换,因为它为人在纳米技术发展中提供了表达责任感的道德机会。沿着这一线索,目前倡导伦理导向的纳米技术发展,就是要把它作为一个多学科背景依赖领域,把参与其社会意义塑造的各种主客体要素引导到人道主义立场上来,以使纳米世界建构真正体现人的全面发展。     

Technology, Methodology and Intervention: Performing Nanoethics in Portugal

During the last few decades we have witnessed a proliferation of exercises dealing with the public participation of citizens in various different dimensions of their societies, including issues of science and technology. On the one hand, these mechanisms provide more robust forms of public engagement with matters that were traditionally dealt with by experts; on the other hand, they raise concerns relating to their design, efficiency or potential for the empowerment of citizens. As part of the EC-funded project DEEPEN (Deepening Ethical Engagement and Participation in Emerging Nanotechnologies) a research team in Coimbra, Portugal, was put in charge of identifying the ethical and social “impacts” of emerging nanotechnologies, transforming the traditional focus groups through the incorporation of two methodological innovations: the Pedagogy of the Oppressed and the Theatre of the Oppressed. This article reflects on the outcomes and complexities of the introduction of these two methodologies. Since the participants had little or no information on nanotechnologies, we reflect on the politics of these focus groups by exploring how issues of intervention, subjectivity, representation and agency were interconnected during this exercise of public participation in Science and Technology, analyzing the role of social sciences in developing nanoethics.     

Nanoethics: From utopian dreams and apocalyptic nightmares towards a more balanced view

Nanotechnology is a swiftly developing field of technology that is believed to have the potential of great upsides and excessive downsides. In the ethical debate there has been a strong tendency to strongly focus on either the first or the latter. As a consequence ethical assessments of nanotechnology tend to radically diverge. Optimistic visionaries predict truly utopian states of affairs. Pessimistic thinkers present all manner of apocalyptic visions. Whereas the utopian views follow from one-sidedly focusing on the potential benefits of nanotechnology, the apocalyptic perspectives result from giving exclusive attention to possible worst-case scenarios. These radically opposing evaluations hold the risk of conflicts and unwanted backlashes. Furthermore, many of these drastic views are based on simplified and outdated visions of a nanotechnology dominated by self-replicating assemblers and nanomachines. Hence, the present state of the ethical debate on nanotechnology calls for the development of more balanced and better-informed assessments. As a first step in this direction this contribution presents a new method of framing the ethical debate on nanotechnology. Thus, the focus of this paper is on methodology, not on normative analysis.     

The Risks,Benefits, and Ethics of Trauma-Focused Research Participation

With the rising interest in the field of trauma research, many Institutional Review Boards, policymakers, parents, and others grapple with the impact of trauma-research participation on research participants' well-being. Do individuals who participate in trauma-focused research risk experiencing lasting negative effects from participation? What are the potential benefits that may be gleaned from participation in this work? How can trauma research studies be designed ethically, minimizing the risk to participants? The following review seeks to answer these questions. This review indicates that most studies in this area have found that only a minority of participants experience distress when participating in trauma-focused research. Furthermore, these negative feelings tend to dissipate quickly over time, with the majority of participants self-appraising their participation as positive, rewarding, and beneficial to society. Design characteristics that may serve to minimize participants' risk of experiencing distress are discussed, as well as implications for public policy and future research.     

Transversal-Universals in Discourse Ethics: Towards a Reconcilable Ethics Between Universalism and Communitarianism

This paper discusses the possibility of an ethics of difference. It begins with an introduction to current poststructural and critical theories in order to show their significance for transcultural politics and ethics. Its theme is formulated in terms of the debate between the affirmation of ethical cognitivism cast in the form of universalism and the advocacy of moral skepticism in the mode of communitarianism. Distancing itself from the idea of universal morality, this paper attempts to respond to the challenge of both communitarians and deconstructionists in contemporary French poststructuralism. In the end, it argues for transversality in place of universality.     

Conducting Health Disparities Research with Criminal Justice Populations: Examining Research,Ethics, and Participation

This study explored the challenges of informed consent and understanding of the research process among Black and Latino men under community supervision (e.g., parole and/or probation). Between February and October 2012, we conducted cognitive face-to-face interviews using open-ended questions on the significant areas of research participation (i.e., the informed consent process, confidentiality, compensation, what is meant by human subject and clinical trials) among 259 men aged 35 to 67 under community supervision in Bronx, New York. Content analysis of the open-ended questions revealed limited knowledge concerning the understanding of research participation. The study participants appeared to generally understand concepts such as compensation after research participation and confidentiality. Participants demonstrated a lack of understanding of certain aspects of the research process—informed consent, human subject, Institutional Review Board, and clinical trials. These findings are informative to researchers conducting studies with criminal justice populations and Institutional Review Boards reviewing research studies.     

Developments in the Debate on Nanoethics: Traditional Approaches and the Need for New Kinds of Analysis

This paper aims to review different discourses within the emerging field of ethical reflection on nanotechnology. I will start by analysing the early stages of this debate, showing how it has been focused on searching for legitimacy for this sphere of moral inquiry. I will then characterise an ethical approach, common to many authors, which frames ethical issues in terms of risks and benefits. This approach identifies normative issues where there are conflicts of interest or where challenges to the fundamental values of our society arise. In response to the limitations of this approach, other commentators have called for more profound analysis of the limits of our knowledge, and have appealed to values, such as sustainability or responsibility, which should, they suggest, inform nanotechnological development (I will define this approach as a “sophisticated form of prudence”). After showing the ways in which these frameworks are limited, I will examine more recent developments in debates on nanoethics which call for the contextualisation of ethical discourse in its ontological, epistemic and socio-economic and political reflections. Such contextualisation thus involves inquiry into the ‘metaphysical research program’ (MRP) of nanotechnology/ies and analysis of the socio-economic, political and historical reality of nano. These ideas offer genuinely new insights into the kind of approach required for nanoethical reflection: they recover a sense of the present alongside the need to engage with the past, while avoiding speculation on the future.     

Election in Bonhoeffer's Ethics: Discerning a Late Revision

Evidence that Bonhoeffer incorporates and responds to portions of Barth's Church Dogmatics II/2 in chapters thought to have been produced without access to Barth's fresh treatment of election mandate a revaluation of Bonhoeffer's controversial ethic and a reconsideration of the hermeneutic proper to his Ethics. Bonhoeffer's conception of election underwent a development from his public academic genesis in Sanctorum Communio to his posthumously published Ethics. His treatment of election in ‘God's Love and the Disintegration of the World’ demonstrates the doctrine's prominent role in his final attempts at reforming Christian ethics and his critique of all previous ethics. Attending to the influence of election illuminates developments in Bonhoeffer's thinking about two of the primary concepts associated with his Ethics–Stellvertretung and Schuldübernahme.     

医学伦理学不可忽视的课题:利益伦理

当今是一个以利益为轴心的时代。利益伦理学是医学伦理学不可忽视的课题。将病人利益置于首位应当是现代医学伦理学的首要原则。欲望是无穷的,利益是有限的。任何利益都有自己的边界和限度。我们必须设置利益的道德界限,以回答当前医学伦理学面临的种种现实课题。     

医学伦理学不可忽视的课题:利益伦理

当今是一个以利益为轴心的时代.利益伦理学是医学伦理学不可忽视的课题.将病人利益置于首位应当是现代医学伦理学的首要原则.欲望是无穷的,利益是有限的.任何利益都有自己的边界和限度.我们必须设置利益的道德界限,以回答当前医学伦理学面临的种种现实课题.