From Homo Faber to Homo Creator? A Theological-Ethical Expedition into the Anthropological Depths of Synthetic Biology

Abstract

Synthetic Biology is supposed to evoke new challenges for science and society. Yet it is a controversial point, up to which extend ethical as well as societal challenges will reach. This paper examines the question as to how a theological-ethical perspective can speak of an anthropological change in the understanding of human beings-as supposed by some philosophers-due to the successes and visions of synthetic biology. Regarding this, the metaphors appearing in the field of synthetic biology (playing God; living machine) will be briefly looked at as possible Indicators of such an anthropological change. Based on this the particular theological understanding of creation will be questioned in order to finally examine the results in regard to its consequences for the discourse of the human being as homo creator."A doctrine of knowledge of the human being, systematically formulated (anthropology), can exist either in a physiological or in a pragmatic point of view. Physiological knowledge of the human being concerns the investigation of what nature makes of the human being; pragmatic, the investigation of what he as a free-acting being makes of himself, or can and should make of himself" (Kant 1798:3). So far the potential of human activity has seemed to be relatively clearly outlined by the limits and conditions of nature. Even though the pursuit of the expansion of these limits has always been present in human actions and culture, the natural basic structures have so far only been modifiable in a paradigmatic manner. This foundation of the © Koninklijke Brill NV. Leiden

The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework

“…The data furthermore showed how the linking and embedding of SB mattered more than their ontological status. There were only limited reflections on the rupturing of binary categories such as living and non-living or nature and culture (Braun et al 2013). People focussed more on the processes triggered by and the embedding of synthetic entities as well as its impacts on humans, society and the environment.…”

Images of synthetic life: Mapping the use and function of metaphors in the public discourse on synthetic biology

“…However, phrases with mechanical and industrial references are most prevalent in public discourse on SB in the observed period [ 19 , 20 ]. The empirically observed high usage of metaphorical expressions correspond to the ongoing broad theoretical discussion on metaphors in the field of SB [ 8 , 9 , 21 – 23 ], which focuses on the occurrence of religiously charged and emotionally appealing expressions, and aims at analysing and assessing SB and its notions of life from a philosophical, ethical or theological perspective.…”

“…In the current public discussion, a special focus is put on the visions and (postulated) products of SB, emphasising the objective of generating new forms of life. These future aims, as well as the related successes proclaimed by scientists within this field, show a potential rupture of cultural concepts of life and nature, blurring the classical distinctions between ‘living’ and ‘non-living’ as well as ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ [ 8 , 9 ]. Such possible developments challenge societal norms and values and may have substantial implications for shared ways of life.…”

How Will the Emerging Plurality of Lives Change How We Conceive of and Relate to Life?

“…From a religious perspective it is sometimes also assumed that the invention of new forms of life is wrong since it means that we are taking over the role of creator. We are "playing God", so to speak [72][73][74][75]. There is also room for discussion among believers of different religions regarding how to relate to life that is created by us and therefore cannot be conceived of as being created by a god.…”