Revolutionary and Familiar, Inevitable and Precarious: Rhetorical Contradictions in Enthusiasm for Nanotechnology |
| |
Authors: | Robert Sparrow |
| |
Institution: | (1) School of Philosophy and Bioethics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia;(2) Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia |
| |
Abstract: | This paper analyses rhetorics of scientific and corporate enthusiasm surrounding nanotechnology. I argue that enthusiasts
for nanotechnologies often try to have it both ways on questions concerning the nature and possible impact of these technologies,
and the inevitability of their development and use. In arguments about their nature and impact we are simultaneously informed
that these are revolutionary technologies with the potential to profoundly change the world and that they merely represent
the extension of existing technologies. They are revolutionary and familiar. In debates surrounding possible regulation of these technologies it is claimed both that their development is inevitable,
so that regulation would be fruitless, and that increased research funding and legislative changes are necessary in order
that we can enjoy their benefits. That is, they are inevitable and precarious. An increased awareness of these rhetorical contradictions may allow us better to assess the likely impact and
future of nanotechnology.
|
| |
Keywords: | Ethics Funding Nanotechnology Public opinion Science Rhetoric Technology |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|