SSBWG Philosophy and the Ethics of Synthetic Biology

1
SSBWGPhilosophy andthe Ethics of Synthetic
Biology

• Wednesday, May 25th

2
Synthetic biology and the ethics of
knowledgeThomas Douglas and Jilian Savulescu,
Philosophy, University of Oxford

• what kinds of knowledge should be sought and
  disseminated?
• the authors primary concern is deliberate misuse
  of knowledge
• greater role for ethicists
• dual-use dilemma
• the field needs principles by which to determine
  what knowledge is too dangerous to pursue and
  disseminate
• test for risk
• precautionary principle
• cost/benefit analysis
• proactionary principle (only clear and immediate
  risks warrant research limits)

3
Dual-Use Dilemma

• The so-called dual-use dilemma arises in the
  context of research in the biological and other
  sciences as a consequence of the fact that one
  and the same piece of scientific research
  sometimes has the potential to be used for evil
  as well as for good.
• A dual-use dilemma is an ethical dilemma, and an
  ethical dilemma for the researcher (and for those
  who have the power or authority to assist or
  impede the researchers work, eg. governments).
  It is an ethical dilemma since it is about
  promoting good in the context of the potential
  for also causing harm, e.g. the promotion of
  health in the context of providing the
  wherewithal for the killing of innocents. It is
  an ethical dilemma for the researcher not because
  he or she is aiming at anything other than a good
  outcome typically, the researcher intends no
  harm, but only good. Rather, the dilemma arises
  for the researcher because of the potential
  actions of others.

Miller and Selgelid. Ethical and philosophical
consideration of the dual-use dilemma in the
biological sciences. Center for Applied
Philosophy and Pubic Ethics for the National
Security Science and Technology Unit. 2006.
4
But scientists are not morally responsible for
how their work is used

• Even if scientists are not held responsible for
  uses of their work, those uses are still relevant
  to the rightness or wrongness of that work

5
The ethical landscape identifying the right way
to think about the ethical and societal aspects
of synthetic biology research and
productsSteven Yearley, Sociology, University
of Edinburgh

• the bioethics template is inadequate for
  synthetic biology
• failure of Venter and Chos ethical review
• public concerns vs. serious ethical concerns
• is impartial ethical advice attainable?
• principlism in bioethics
• The bioethics review is also a poor model for
  desirable kinds of review of synthetic biology
  because the assumption of the centrality of
  universal ethical principles is even less
  applicable to these startling areas of biological
  innovation than to the case of novel medical
  interventions.

6
Principles of Bioethics

• RESPECT FOR AUTONOMY
• Does my action impinge on an individual's
  personal autonomy?
• Do all relevant parties consent to my action?
• Do I acknowledge and respect that others may
  choose differently?
• BENEFICENCE
• Who benefits from my action and in what way?
• NON-MALEFICENCE
• Which parties may be harmed by my action?
• What steps can I take to minimize this harm?
• Have I communicated risks involved in a truthful
  and open manner?
• In the event of a disaster, how can I avert the
  possible harm caused?
• JUSTICE
• Have I identified all vulnerable groups that may
  be affected by my action?
• Is my proposed action equitable? How can I make
  it more equitable