Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nanoethics: From utopian dreams and apocalyptic nightmares towards a more balanced view

  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nanotechnology is a swiftly developing field of technology that is believed to have the potential of great upsides and excessive downsides. In the ethical debate there has been a strong tendency to strongly focus on either the first or the latter. As a consequence ethical assessments of nanotechnology tend to radically diverge. Optimistic visionaries predict truly utopian states of affairs. Pessimistic thinkers present all manner of apocalyptic visions. Whereas the utopian views follow from one-sidedly focusing on the potential benefits of nanotechnology, the apocalyptic perspectives result from giving exclusive attention to possible worst-case scenarios. These radically opposing evaluations hold the risk of conflicts and unwanted backlashes. Furthermore, many of these drastic views are based on simplified and outdated visions of a nanotechnology dominated by self-replicating assemblers and nanomachines. Hence, the present state of the ethical debate on nanotechnology calls for the development of more balanced and better-informed assessments. As a first step in this direction this contribution presents a new method of framing the ethical debate on nanotechnology. Thus, the focus of this paper is on methodology, not on normative analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moore, A. (2001) Brave Small World. Biotechnology and Nanotechnology may give Rise to a Completely New Industry. EMBO Reports 2 (2): 86–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Peterson, C. (2003) Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Full Science Committee Hearing on The Societal Implications of Nanotechnology, April 9, 2003 (available at http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/full03/apr09/peterson.htm; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  3. Stix, G. (2001) Little Big Science. Scientific American 285 (3): 26–31.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jacobstein, N and Reynolds, G.H. (2004) Foresight Guidelines Version 4.0: Self Assessment Scorecards for Safer Development of Nanotechnology (available at http://www.foresight.org/guidelines/current.html; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  5. Bachmann, G. (1998) Innovationsschub aus dem Nanokosmos. Technologieanalyse. VDI-Technologiezentrum, Düsseldorf.

    Google Scholar 

  6. May, M. (1999) Nanotechnology: Thinking Small. Environmental Health Perspectives 107 (9): A450-A451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology, Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (2000) National Nanotechnology Initiative: The Initiative and Its Implementation Plan. Washington, D.C. (available at http://www.nano.gov/html/res/nni2.pdf; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  8. Drexler, K.E. (1986) Engines of Creation. The Coming Era of Nanotechnology. Anchor Press/Doubleday, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Von Neumann, J. (1951) The general and logical theory of automata, in Jeffress, L.A. ed. Cerebral Mechanisms in Behavior. John Wiley, New York: 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Feynman, R. (1992) There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom [reprint]. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems 1 (1): 65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dewdney, A.K. (1988) Nanotechnology: Wherein Molecular Computers control Tiny Circulatory Submarines. Scientific American 258 (1): 100–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Freitas, R.A.Jr. (1999) Nanomedicine, Volume I: Basic Capabilities. Landes Bioscience, Georgetown, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Herzog, A. (2002) Of Genomics, Cyborgs and Nanotechnology: A Look into the Future of Medicine. Connecticut Medicine 66 (1): 53–54.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Merkle R.C. (1992) The Technical Feasibility of Cryonics. Medical Hypotheses 39: 6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Merkle, R.C. (1996) Nanotechnology and Medicine, in: Klatz, R.M. ed. Advances in Anti-Aging Medicine. Vol. I. Larchmont, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., New York: pp. 277–286.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ashley, S. (2001) Nanobot Construction Crews. Scientific American 285 (3): 76–77.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Smalley, R.E. (2001) Of Chemistry, Love and Nanobots. Scientific American 285 (3): 68–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Phoenix, C. and Drexler, E. (2004) Safe Exponential Manufacturing. Nanotechnology 15: 869–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Freitas, R.A.Jr. (1998) Nanomedicine FAQ. (available at http://www.foresight.org/Nanomedicine/index.html#NM%20FAQ; accessed 17 September, 2005)

  20. Kaku, M. (1997) Visions. How Science will revolutionize the 21 st Century. Anchor Books/Doubleday, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kurzweil R. (1999) The Age of Spiritual Machines. When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. The Viking Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bostrom, N. (2003) The Transhumanist FAQ — A General Introduction — Version 2.1. (available at http://www.transhumanism.org/resources/faq.html; accessed 17 September, 2005)

  23. Merkle, R.C. (1994) The Molecular Repair of the Brain. Part I. Cryonics 15 (1): 16–31.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Merkle, R.C. (1994) The Molecular Repair of the Brain. Part II. Cryonics 15 (2): 20–32.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mnyusiwalla, A., Daar, A.S. and Singer, P.A. (2003) Mind the Gap: Science and Ethics in Nanotechnology. Nanotechnology 14: R9-R13;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Peterson, C. (2003) Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Full Science Committee Hearing on The Societal Implications of Nanotechnology, April 9, 2003 (available at http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/full03/apr09/peterson.htm; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  27. Joy B. (2000) Why the Future doesn’t need Us. Wired. 8.04 (available at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  28. Service, R.F. (2000) Is Nanotechnology Dangerous? Science 290 (November 24): 1526–1527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Crichton, M. (2002) Prey. Harper Collins, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Alivisatos, A.P. (2001) Less is More in Medicine. Scientific American 285 (3): 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Randal, J. (2001) Nanotechnology getting off the Ground in Cancer Research. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 93 (24): 1836–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Roco, M.C. and Bainbridge, W.S. (2002) Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science. Arlington, Virginia (available at http://wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  33. Popper, K. (1982) The Open Universe: An Argument for Indeterminism. Hutchinson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bogunia-Kubick, K and Sugisaka, M. (2002) From Molecular Biology to Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine. Biosystems 65 (2–3): 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Taton, T.A. (2001) Nanotechnology. Boning up on Biology. Nature 412 (August 2): 491–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36 ETC. (2003) The Big Down: Technologies Converging at the Nano-scale. (available at http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/TheBigDown.pdf; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  37. Winner, L. (2003) Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Full Science Committee Hearing on The Societal Implications of Nanotechnology, April 9, 2003 (available at http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/full03/apr09/winner.htm; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  38. Hett, A. (2004) Nanotechnology: Small Matter, Many Unknowns. Swiss Reinsurance Company, Zürich (available at http://www.swissre.com/; accessed 17 September, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nanoforum, (2004) Benefits, Risks, Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Nanotechnology (available at http://www.nanoforum.org/; accessed 17 September, 2005).

  40. The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering (Royal Society). (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties — Summary and Recommendations. The Royal Society, London. (available at http://www.nanotec.org.uk/report/summary.pdf; accessed 17 September, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  41. European Union. (2004) Communication from the Commission. Towards a European Strategy for Nanotechnology, Brussel. (available at ftp://ftp.cordis.lu/pub/nanotechnology/docs/nano_com_en.pdf; accessed 17 September, 2005).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine (232 EFG), Radboud University Medical Centre Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Bert Gordijn Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Bert Gordijn Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bert Gordijn Ph.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gordijn, B. Nanoethics: From utopian dreams and apocalyptic nightmares towards a more balanced view. SCI ENG ETHICS 11, 521–533 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-005-0024-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-005-0024-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation