Advertisement

Studies in Philosophy and Education

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 1–11 | Cite as

Biotechnology, ethics and education

  • Peter John FitzsimonsEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Fundamental differences between current and past knowledge in the field of biotechnology mean that we now have at our disposal the means to irreversibly change what is meant by ‘human nature’. This paper explores some of the ethical issues that accompany the (as yet tentative) attempt to increase scientific control over the human genetic code in what amounts to a diminishing of difference and the reduction of human life to scientific explanations at the expense of spiritual, cultural and communal considerations. Within such a limited view, the critical role of education is reduced in favour of promoting psychological efficiency, with the possibility of accelerating learning and increasing intellectual capacity through genetic manipulation. A major concern expressed in the paper is the fine line between corrective therapy and psychological enhancement: Who should be defining the normal range of human difference? And what degree of caution should be required in redesigning future generations? The unknown dangers inherent in the (perhaps irreversible) application of genetic technology to human life suggests that current precautions may not go far enough in recognising that education is a contestable field.

Keywords

Bioethics Biotechnology Subjectivity Genetic modification Identity 

References

  1. Bostrom, N. (2005). In defence of posthuman dignity. Bioethics, 19(3), 202–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brits may lift ‘designer baby’ ban. (2005, 18 August 2005). New Zealand Herald, p. 3.Google Scholar
  3. Buchanan, A., Brock, D., Daniels, N., & Wikler, D. (2000). From chance to choice. Genetics and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Fleming, G. (2005). Rotorua woman to undergo stem cell procedure in China. Press release 4 March 2005, NZPA. http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3206162a10,00.htmlGoogle Scholar
  5. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline & Punish: (A. Sheridan, Trans.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  6. Foucault, M. (2001a). The subject and power. In J. Faubion (Ed.), Power: The essential works 3 (pp. 326–348). London: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Foucault, M. (2001b). Truth and juridical forms. In J. Faubion (Ed.), Power: The essential works 3 (pp. 1–89). London: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  8. Foucault, M. (2003). Abnormal: Lectures at the Collège de France. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  9. Habermas, J. (2003). The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Junker-Kenny, M. (2005). Genetic enhancement as care or as domination? The ethics of asymmetrical relationships in the upbringing of children. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 39(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ministry of Research, Science and Technology. (2003). New Zealand biotechnology strategy. Wellington.Google Scholar
  12. NZPA. (2005). NZ takes its biotech to the world. New Zealand Herald, p. 14.Google Scholar
  13. Office of the Associate Minister of Education [Tertiary Education]. (2002). Excellence, relevance and access: An introduction to the new tertiary education system. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  14. Raffensperger, C., & Barrett, K. (2001). In defense of the precautionary principle. Nature Biotechnology, 19(9), 811–812.Google Scholar
  15. Rifkin, J. (1998). The biotech century. New York: Penguin Putnam Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Roper, J., Zorn, T., & Weaver, C. (2004). Science dialogues: The communicative properties of science and technology dialogue (A Project for the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology): Department of Management Communication, University of Waikato.Google Scholar
  17. Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. (2001). Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. Wellington, p. 363.Google Scholar
  18. Savulescu, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics, 15(5/6), 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Turkle, S. (1984). The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Auckland Medical Aid TrustAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations