Is Nanotechnology Giving Rise to New Ethical Problems?

NanoEthics, 2009

The current literature on nanoethics focuses on a wide array of topics such as equity, privacy, military, environment, human enhancement, intellectual property, and security. The identification of those topics leads to the adoption of an ethical stance, which we call the in itself dimension. In this article we argue that even though it is correct to identify the areas where ethical problems are imperative to deal with (in itself dimension), it is a partial approach. This is because the in itself dimension pays no attention to another ethical stance; one that does not have anything to do with individual or collective responsibilities, but rather with the socio-economic system into which those responsibilities are embedded. We call this second issue the contextual dimension.

2008

This brief paper introduces the subject of Nanotechnology and its ethical implications as an applied technology. It goes on to explore and present a blueprint for the theological, legal and ethical issues which Muslim scholars may need to address, as well as a framework through which scholars can determine relevant solutions.

2018

Since a significant time ago, although time runs very fast, nanotechnology transformed from one of the most promising scientific hopes in uncountable human domains into a marvelous certainty. Innumerable scientific studies in several areas of knowledge were made since nanoscale emergence, carrying their contribution to the nanoscience development, leading to a great development of technical and scientific knowledge but also raising numerous problems in the ethical field. In this chapter, nanotechnology is discussed both in terms of ethics and in terms of borders that nanotechnology applications must satisfy and concluding notes are presented, highlighting the results of the analysis. Significant considerations are made on the close connection between ethics and the nanotechnology and the effects over the society and values.

2021

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 2009

Nanotechnologies are expected to have a substantial impact on our lives in the future. However, the nanotechnology field is characterised by many uncertainties and debates surrounding the characterisation of technologies, the nature of the applications, the potential benefits and the likely risks. Given the rapid development of nanotechnologies, it is timely to consider what, if any, novel ethical challenges are posed by developments and how best to address these given the attendant uncertainties. The three articles which comprise this symposium consider the philosophical, regulatory and risk perception and communication questions that arise from this arena.

NanoEthics, 2011

How are we to understand the fact that the philosophical debate over nanotechnologies has been reduced to a clash of seemingly preprogrammed arguments and counterarguments that paralyzes all rational discussion of the ultimate ethical question of social acceptability in matters of nanotechnological development? With this issue as its starting point, the study reported on here, intended to further comprehension of the issues rather than provide a cause-andeffect explanation, seeks to achieve a rational grasp of what is being said through the appeals made to this or that principle in the range of arguments put forward in publications on the subject. We present the results of the study's analyses in two parts. In the first, we lay out the seven categories of argument that emerged from an analysis of the literature: the arguments based on nature, dignity, the good life, utility, equity, autonomy, and rights. In the second part, we present the background moral stances that support each category of argument. Identifying the different categories of argument and the moral stance that underlies each category will enable a better grasp of the reasons for the multiplicity of the arguments that figure in discussions of the acceptability of nanotechnologies and will ultimately contribute to overcoming the tendency towards talking past each other that all too often disfigures the exchange. Clarifying the implications of the moral arguments deployed in the debate over nanotechnologies may make it possible to reduce the confusion observable in these exchanges and contribute to a better grasp of the reasons for their current unproductiveness. Keywords Acceptability. Debate on nanotechnology. Dialogue. Interdisciplinarity. Moral arguments. Nanoethics. Philosophy and nanotechnology. Social acceptability and nanotechnology As has been pointed out by Jean-Pierre Dupuy ([4]: 238), philosophical debate over the ethical foundations of nanotechnology has become so routine that it would be easy to simply rhyme off the arguments regularly brought forward: 'The same arguments are always served up, and they are always answered with the same counter-arguments.' How are we to understand the fact that this philosophical debate has been reduced to a clash among seemingly preprogrammed arguments and counterarguments that are paralyzing

2009

2008

Nanoethics, or the study of nanotechnology's ethical and social implications, is an emerging but controversial field. Outside of the industry and academia, most people are first introduced to nanotechnology through fictional works that posit scenarios���which scientists largely reject���of self-replicating ���nanobots��� running amok like a pandemic virus (Crichton, 2002).

Nanotechnologies are considered to be one of the spearheads of emerging technologies. They are qualified by some as a new technological revolution, in the sense that they can change the way humans perceive ourselves and relate to our natural and social environments. If a human activity is thought to cause such revolutionary changes, it should be accompanied by a reflection. In order to give such a reflection an ethical dimension we need to fix a framework, a set of commonly accepted definitions of concepts and terminology. Questions like: «what does being nanotechnological mean?» do not seem satisfactorily answered, or the answers given to date do not seem to satisfy all stakeholders. We analyze the lacks in some of the definitions found in available literature. From this analysis, and taking as a basis the philosophical paradigm of epistemic realism, which we claim it could be adequate for ethics purposes, we go on to propose an approach which, we argue, could motivate further thinking on definitions that could serve ethics reflection on nanotechnologies.

Advances in Computers, 2007

This chapter reviews the role ethical and societal issues associated with nanotechnology have played in the development of national, and particularly US nanotechnology policies. The prominence of nanotechnology as a matter of national policy is significant, as is the attention being afforded to ethical and societal considerations. Notably, there is an emphasis on the early anticipation of societal dimensions of nanotechnology and of collaborative socio-technical integration during research and development activities. While these policies are fairly unprecedented and pose considerable challenges to the societal and technical researchers to whom the tasks of early integration may fall, there is reason to believe that continued efforts aimed at their implementation are likely. The chapter provides a brief history and explanation of the US nanotechnology "ethics policy" in reference to the discourse and concerns motivating policy makers. It then surveys some of the growing body of literature emerging around what has been termed nanoethics. This literature includes a similar emphasis on early and collaborative anticipation of the ethical and societal implications surrounding nanotechnology. Finally, the chapter identifies a list of fundamental tasks that would be necessary to address for the sake of developing the capacity of social and technical researchers to effectively engage in socio-technical integration. These tasks include defining the scope of nanoscale science and engineering subject to the ethics policy, and the interactions, responsibility, participation, and regulation envisioned or implied by the ethics policy under consideration. A few emerging cases of socio-technical collaborations are noted, and key statements made by congressional witnesses and others are cited. Throughout the chapter, an attempt is made to frame the statements within conceptual considerations drawn from the diverse contexts of nanotechnology, policy, and ethics.