Engaging Narratives and the Limits of Lay Ethics: Introduction

Abstract

How can one discover the ethical issues associated with nanotechnologies? One heuristic is to tend closely to the ethical reflections of lay publics and the ways in which these are informed by experience with technological innovation, technology governance, and the (broken) promises of visionary science and technology. A close collaboration between social scientists and philosophers took this heuristic to its limits: On the one hand, it achieved remarkably finegrained insights into public reflection about nanotechnologies. On the other hand, a philosophical analysis of these reflections makes apparent that there is a profound disconnect between the lay ethics rooted in public talk and the ethical and normative commitments that are embedded in nanotechnological research programs and practices. Accordingly, critical engagement with the ways in which ordinary people try to make sense of nanotechnologies constitutes a novel heuristic for the discovery of ethical issues. This introduction and the subsequent four papers show this heuristic at work.Keywords Heuristics for the discovery of ethical issues . Narratives . Conversation and deliberation . Language games of ethicsThe European Commission issued in 2005 a call for proposals for projects that aimed at "deepening understanding of ethical issues." 1 One of the projects funded under this call, the so-called DEEPEN project, offered cross-disciplinary research that aimed towards the identification and characterization of the ethical issues posed by emerging nanotechnologies. This understanding was to develop from the sustained interplay of a normative perspective provided by philosophical analysis and the deliberative engagement with publics, stakeholders and the nanoscience community. Among the various findings of this project, one is of particular interest for nanoethics: while the DEEPEN project began with one understanding of what it might mean to deepen ethical understanding, it ended with quite another. But where one of its aspirations was disappointed, new insights

Beyond Conversation: Some Lessons for Nanoethics

“…This finding resonates with Tsjalling Swierstra and Arie Rip's notion of NEST-ethics [22] and with a criticism of extant nanoethics that motivated the DEEPEN project in the first place [15]. Swierstra and Rip identify certain patterns that reappear in the discussions of 'new and emerging science and technology (NEST)', for example the pattern of claiming radical novelty and insisting at the same time that the novel technologies are only more of the same.…”

“…However, it is first of all the notion of the infinite plasticity and potentiality of all things that calls for ethical inquiry, namely an inquiry into the logic, hubris, and metaphysical program of design. 15 Kept in the Dark-And the Power of Nanotechnoscience When people worry that they are being kept in the dark, they raise the question of power. While 12 Dupuy's critical discussion of the five story-lines served as a heuristic by opening up a wider space of reflection.…”

Integration needs in assessments of nanotechnology in food and agriculture

“…Some interpret narratives as 'lay ethics' and this approach was taken in the European Deepen project (Deepening Ethical Engagement and Participation in Emerging Nanotechnologies) (Nordmann & Macnaghten 2012;Dupuy 2010). Explicating narratives may be a matter of integration as it may serve to better identify sources of conflicts and thereby address these in a more comprehensive manner.…”

Nano-scientists as Consumers and Sources of Information about Nanoethics

“…This has led some scholars to suggest that scarce participation among nano-scientists makes these discussions futile, advocating that nanoethics discussions be broadened to include interdisciplinary collaborations (Rasmussen et al, 2012). Other scholars have identified differences in viewpoints about nanoethics between scientists and lay people (Davies & Macnaghten, 2010;Nordmann & Macnaghten, 2010) and different perspectives between scientists and industrial practitioners (Shelley-Egan, 2010).…”