Responsibility and Social Traps

Lenk, Hans; Maring, Matthias

doi:10.5840/ijap199611116

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 Potential moral implications resulting from the design of such conflicting interests will be discussed below. 11 Hans Lenk describes responsibility as a relational term with up to five positions including the following three positions: The agent (subject) is responsible for something (for instance an action) in view of an addressee (the object of responsibility) (Lenk, 1999: 106-109;Lenk and Maring, 2001). 12 See: http://parts.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/About_iGEM 13 Although this is true for most current applications of synthetic biology, there may be certain procedures, such as the production of an organism with conflicting interests, which would be difficult to bring into accordance with a respectful attitude towards the product.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Moral Impact of Synthesising Living Organisms: Biocentric Views on Synthetic Biology

Deplazes‐Zemp¹

2012

Environmental Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay examines how biocentric positions assess the aims and planned products of synthetic biology. In this emerging field, scientists and engineers aim at designing and producing new life forms by various procedures. In this paper I explore whether, for biocentrists, 1) synthetic organisms have moral standing and, 2) the process of synthesising living organisms has moral implications. Because naturalness plays a role in some biocentric theories, synthetic biology -at first sight -seems to challenge the idea that all living organisms have moral standing. However, according to the interpretations that I offer, the biocentric positions discussed here would also assign moral standing to synthetic organisms. That living organisms have moral standing does not necessarily imply that it is morally problematic to synthesise them. However, different lines of biocentric argumentation suggest that in designing and synthesising living organisms, the moral standing of the product needs to be taken into account. This means among other things, that according to biocentrists, such procedures may lead to special responsibilities or require certain attitudes from scientists towards their products. AbstractThis essay examines how biocentric positions assess the aims and planned products of synthetic biology. In this emerging field, scientists and engineers aim at designing and producing new life forms by various procedures. In this paper I explore whether, for biocentrists, 1) synthetic organisms have moral standing and, 2) the process of synthesising living organisms has moral implications. Because naturalness plays a role in some biocentric theories, synthetic biology -at first sight-seems to challenge the idea that all living organisms have moral standing.However, according to the interpretations that I offer, the biocentric positions discussed here would also assign moral standing to synthetic organisms.That living organisms have moral standing does not necessarily imply that it is morally problematic to synthesize them. However, different lines of biocentric argumentation suggest that in designing and synthesising living organisms, the moral standing of the product needs to be taken into account. This means among other things, that according to biocentrists, such procedures may lead to special responsibilities or require certain attitudes from scientists towards their products.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Moral Impact of Synthesising Living Organisms: Biocentric Views on Synthetic Biology

Deplazes‐Zemp¹

2012

Environmental Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Ethics of responsibilities distributions in a technological culture

Lenk

2016

AI & Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I develop and differentiate some problems of the interaction between corporations, individuals and the general public as well as institutions like the state or international non-governmental organizations as well as super-national organizations. Firms or corporations are nowadays much more international than they used to be; they are typically multinational enterprises giving rise to special transnational problems of transactions, interchanges and-indeed also-responsibilities ranging over national borders and restricted areas. In our culture, we have to deal with rather ramified types of individual and collective as well as specific corporate responsibilities tending to reach out beyond national borders, specific state law restrictions and even business systems and economies. The traditional personal and individual responsibility and their different forms will not do to cope with all the respective international, intercultural and inter-sectoral problems of modern corporations and their international interactions. In the paper, I have also discussed the question: Do multinational organizations and corporations have a sort of specific corporate responsibility, and if so, against whom and for what-except for their share-and stakeholders?

show abstract

Responsibility and Social Traps

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

The Moral Impact of Synthesising Living Organisms: Biocentric Views on Synthetic Biology

The Moral Impact of Synthesising Living Organisms: Biocentric Views on Synthetic Biology

Ethics of responsibilities distributions in a technological culture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About