Evaluating biological artifacts

Synthetic cells in the philosophy of technology
  • Johannes Achatz
Part of the Technikzukünfte, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft / Futures of Technology, Science and Society book series (TEWG)


Synthetic biology produces biological artifacts. The artifact might be a synthetic cell with an artificially created and transplanted genome (Gibson et al. 2010). It might be a bacterium “programmed” to produce a kind of bio-fuel (Choi and Lee 2013; Howard et al. 2013).


Synthetic Biology Moral Evaluation Actual Character Agentive Function Human Purpose 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Achatz, J. (2013). Synthetische Biologie und ‚natürliche‘ Moral: ein Beschreibungs- und Bewertungszugang zu den Erzeugnissen Synthetischer Biologie. Freiburg: Alber.Google Scholar
  2. Achatz, J. (2014). Framing ‚Nature‘ – Synthetische Biologie schreibt (ihre) Geschichte. In: J. Achatz, N. Knoepffler (eds.), Lebensformen – Leben formen. Ethik und Synthetische Biologie (pp. 83–100). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  3. Annaluru, N., Muller, H., Mitchell, L.A., Ramalingam, S., Stracquadanio, G., Richardson, S.M., … Chandrasegaran, S. (2014). Total Synthesis of a Functional Designer Eukaryotic Chromosome. Science, 344, 55–58. doi: 10.1126/science.1249252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotle (1987). Physics. In: J.L. Ackrill (ed.), A new Aristotle reader (pp. 81–131). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  5. Bedau, M., & Parke, E.C. (eds.) (2009). The ethics of protocells – moral and social implications of creating life in the laboratory. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Benjamin, W. (1991). Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit. In: R. Tiedemann, H. Schweppenhäuser (eds.), Gesammelte Schriften Bd. 1 Abhandlungen Teil 2 (Vol. I, pp.471–508). Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  7. Boden, M.A. (ed.) (1996). The philosophy of artificial life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brenner, S. (2012). Turing centenary: Life’s code script. Nature, 482(7386), 461–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choi, Y.J., & Lee, S.Y. (2013). Microbial production of short-chain alkanes. Nature, 502(7472), 571–574. doi: 10.1038/nature12536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Church, G.M., & Regis, E. (2012). Regenesis: how synthetic biology will reinvent nature and ourselves. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  11. Church, G.M., Gao, Y., & Kosuri, S. (2012). Next-Generation Digital Information Storage in DNA. Science, 337(6102), 1628. doi: 10.1126/science.1226355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Currie, G. (1989). An Ontology of Art (Vol. 40). London: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, J. (1996). Microvenus. Art Journal, 55(1), 70–74. doi: 10.2307/777811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dewey, J. (1922). Valuation and Experimental Knowledge. The Philosophical Review, 31(4), 325–351. doi: 10.2307/2179099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dewey, J. (1998). From Absolutism to Experimentalism. In: L. A. Hickman (ed.), The essential Dewey – Pragmatism, education, democracy (Vol. 1, pp.14–21). Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dipert, R.R. (1986). Art, Artifacts, and Regarded Intentions. American Philosophical Quarterly, 23(4), 401–408. doi: 10.2307/20014165.Google Scholar
  17. ECNH (2010). Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology. Synthetic biology – Ethical considerations. Bern.Google Scholar
  18. ECNH (2011). Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology. Report of activities 2008–2011. Bern.Google Scholar
  19. FOE, CTA, & ETC. (2012). Friends of the Earth, International Center for Technology Assessment, & ETC-Group. The Principles for the Oversight of Synthetic Biology. Accessed: 19 May 2015.
  20. Gibson, D.G., Glass, J.I., Lartigue, C., Noskov, V.N., Chuang, R.Y., Algire, M.A.,… Venter,Google Scholar
  21. J.C. (2010). Creation of a bacterial cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome. Science, 329(5987), 52–56. doi: 10.1126/science.1190719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hilpinen, R. (1992). On artifacts and works of art. Theoria, 58(1), 58–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hilpinen, R. (1995). Belief Systems as Artifacts. The Monist, 78(2), 136–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hilpinen, R. (2011). Artifact. In: E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 ed.).Google Scholar
  25. Hobaiter, C., Poisot, T., Zuberbühler, K., Hoppitt, W., & Gruber, T. (2014). Social Network Analysis Shows Direct Evidence for Social Transmission of Tool Use in Wild Chimpanzees. PLOS Biology, 12(9), e1001960. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Houkes, W., & Vermaas, P.E. (2010). Technical Functions: On the Use and Design of Artefacts. Series: Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 1. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. doi: 10.1007/978–90-481–3900-2.Google Scholar
  27. Howard, T.P., Middelhaufe, S., Moore, K., Edner, C., Kolak, D.M., Taylor, G.N.,…Google Scholar
  28. Love, J. (2013). Synthesis of customized petroleum-replica fuel molecules by targeted modification of free fatty acid pools in Escherichia coli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1215966110.Google Scholar
  29. Hubig, C. (1993). Technik- und Wissenschaftsethik: ein Leitfaden. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jonas, H. (1979). Das Prinzip Verantwortung: Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt/Main: Insel.Google Scholar
  31. Jonas, H. (1984). Das Prinzip Verantwortung: Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  32. Kapp, E. (1877). Grundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik: zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Cultur aus neuen Gesichtspunkten. Braunschweig: Westermann.Google Scholar
  33. Karafyllis, N.C. (2003). Biofakte: Versuch über den Menschen zwischen Artefakt und Lebewesen. Paderborn: Mentis.Google Scholar
  34. Karafyllis, N.C. (2006). Biofakte – Grundlagen, Probleme, Perspektiven. Erwägen Wissen Ethik EWE, 17(4), 547–558.Google Scholar
  35. Kerbe, W., & Schmidt, M. (2013). Splicing boundaries: The experiences of bioart exhibition visitors. Leonardo, 48(2), 128–136. doi: 10.1162/LEON_a_00701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Knoepffler, N., & O’Malley, M. (2014). Synthetische Biologie – Ethische Überlegungen. In: J. Achatz & N. Knoepffler (eds.), Lebensformen – Leben formen. Ethik und Synthetische Biologie (pp. 55–69). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  37. Kroes, P. (2012). Technical Artefacts: Creations of Mind and Matter (Vol. 6). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Krohs, U., & Kroes, P. (2009). Functions in biological and artificial worlds: comparative philosophical perspectives. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kunzmann, P. (2010). Die Verantwortung des Verbrauchers und einige ihrer Grenzen. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit, 5(1), 1–5. doi: 10.1007/s00003- 009–0528-8.Google Scholar
  40. Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., & Behrens III, W.W. (1972). The limits to growth: a report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books.Google Scholar
  41. Morange, M. (2013). Comparison Between the Work of Synthetic Biologists and the Action of Evolution: Engineering Versus Tinkering. Biological Theory, 8(4), 318–323. doi: 10.1007/ s13752–013-0134-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Næss, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: a summary. Inquiry, 16, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. O’Malley, M. (2013). Value Ethics: A Meta-Ethical Framework for Emerging Sciences in Pluralistic Contexts. In: C. Baumbach-Knopf, J. Achatz, N. Knoepffler (eds.), Facetten der Ethik (pp. 73–93). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  44. O’Malley, M.A. (2011). Exploration, iterativity and kludging in synthetic biology. Comptes Rendus Chimie, 14(4), 406–412. doi: 10.1016/j.crci.2010.06.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Malley, M.A. (2014). Philosophy of microbiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Passmore, J.A. (1974). Man’s responsibility for nature: ecological problems and Western traditions. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
  47. Putnam, H. (2003). The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays (2nd print ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Rasmussen, S., Bedau, M.A., Chen, L., Deamer, D., Krakauer, D.C., Packard, N.H., & Stadler, P.F. (2009). Protocells: bridging nonliving and living matter. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Rutz, C., & St Clair, J.J.H. (2012). The evolutionary origins and ecological context of tool use in New Caledonian crows. Behavioural Processes, 89(2), 153–165. doi: beproc.2011.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schönig, B. (2014). Synthetische Biologie: Biologische Sicherheit und Risikobewertung durch die ZKBS. In: J. Achatz, N. Knoepffler (eds.), Lebensformen – Leben formen; Ethik und Synthetische Biologie (pp. 26–36). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Google Scholar
  52. Schrödinger, E. (2004). Was ist Leben? Die lebende Zelle mit den Augen des Physikers betrachtet. München: Piper.Google Scholar
  53. Searle, J.R. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  54. Searle, J.R. (2011). Making the social world: the structure of human civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation: a new ethics for our treatment of animals. New York: New York Review.Google Scholar
  56. Stone, C.D. (1974). Should trees have standing? Toward legal rights for natural objects. Los Altos, Calif.: W. Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  57. Venter, J.C. (2013). Life at the speed of light: from the double helix to the dawn of digital life. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  58. Weber, M. (1946). Politics as a Vocation. In: H.H. Gerth, C.W. Mills (eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 77–128). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Weber, M. (1949). The Meaning of “Ethical Neutrality” in Sociology and Economics. In: E. Shils, H. Finch (eds.), Max Weber on the methodology of the social sciences (1st ed., pp.1–47). Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.Google Scholar
  60. Weisberg, M., Needham, P., & Hendry, R. (2011). Philosophy of Chemistry. In: E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 ed.).Google Scholar
  61. Wittgenstein, L. (1986). Philosophical investigations (trans. by G.E.M. Anscombe, 3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes Achatz
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Ethics JenaFriedrich Schiller University JenaJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations