Synthetic Biology and the Argument from Continuity with Established Technologies

TY - CHAP

T1 - Synthetic Biology and the Argument from Continuity with Established Technologies

AU - Christiansen, Andreas

N1 - Cop. 2016, men udgivet 2015

PY - 2015/8/27

Y1 - 2015/8/27

N2 - Defenders of synthetic biology commonly make reference to the fact that established technologies, such as domestication or selective breeding, share some of the features of synthetic biology that critics argue make it ethically problematic. In this chapter, I reconstruct such references as instances of a type of argument which I dub the Continuity Argument. Roughly, the Continuity Argument seeks to show that if we are not disposed to reject the established technology, then features that this technology share with synthetic biology cannot provide reasons to find it ethically problematic. I assess the soundness of this argument and point out three problems with it: (1) That it fails to show that we should stop being critical of synthetic biology rather than start being critical of the established technologies; (2) that it does not take differences in degree into account; and (3) that it ignores the distinction between what reasons we have and what we should do all things considered. I then illustrate the Continuity Argument and its problems in the case where human manipulation of organisms’ genetic makeup is a suggested reason for finding synthetic biology problematic. Finally, I suggest ways in which references to established technologies can be used in a sound way in the ethical assessment of synthetic biology.

AB - Defenders of synthetic biology commonly make reference to the fact that established technologies, such as domestication or selective breeding, share some of the features of synthetic biology that critics argue make it ethically problematic. In this chapter, I reconstruct such references as instances of a type of argument which I dub the Continuity Argument. Roughly, the Continuity Argument seeks to show that if we are not disposed to reject the established technology, then features that this technology share with synthetic biology cannot provide reasons to find it ethically problematic. I assess the soundness of this argument and point out three problems with it: (1) That it fails to show that we should stop being critical of synthetic biology rather than start being critical of the established technologies; (2) that it does not take differences in degree into account; and (3) that it ignores the distinction between what reasons we have and what we should do all things considered. I then illustrate the Continuity Argument and its problems in the case where human manipulation of organisms’ genetic makeup is a suggested reason for finding synthetic biology problematic. Finally, I suggest ways in which references to established technologies can be used in a sound way in the ethical assessment of synthetic biology.

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-21088-9

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-21088-9

M3 - Book chapter

SN - 978-3-319-21087-2

T3 - Ethics of Science and Technology Assessment

SP - 293

EP - 311

BT - Ambivalences of Creating Life

A2 - Hagen, Kristin

A2 - Engelhard, Margaret

A2 - Toepfer, Georg

PB - Springer

CY - Cham

ER -