Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is Nanotechnology Giving Rise to New Ethical Problems?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
NanoEthics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I focus on the question of whether nanotechnology is giving rise to new ethical problems rather than merely to new instances of old ethical problems. Firstly, I demonstrate how important it is to make a general distinction between new ethical problems and new instances of old problems. Secondly, I propose one possible way of interpreting the distinction and offer a definition of a “new ethical problem”. Thirdly, I examine whether there is good reason to claim that nanotechnology is giving or will give rise to new ethical problems. My conclusion is that there are no new ethical problems in nanotechnology but merely new occurrences of certain well-known types of ethical problems. Fourthly, I consider three arguments by van de Poel (NanoEthics 2:25–28, 2008) which contradict my conclusion. I argue that my negative conclusion is consistent with the claim that certain ethical issues arising in nanotechnology may require new normative standards or new analytical tools. I conclude that it is likely that a number of ethical issues arising in nanotechnology will have a considerable impact on our ethical theories and values – and that ethical reflection on nanotechnology will be one of the mother lodes of future ethical research – in spite of the fact that no ethical problem in nanoethics will actually be “new”.

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

Notes

  1. The same point is made by Tavani [46] with regards to the same debate in computer ethics.

  2. Lewenstein [28] can be considered to be guided by a parallel need to clarify the underlying meaning of ‘a social and ethical issue’, both in nanotechnology and in any other area of emerging science and technology. See also Braunack-Mayer [7].

  3. Sandler ([42]: 17) is one of very few researchers who holds not only that nanotechnology does give rise to new ethical problems (‘unfamiliar issues’), but also believes that we should not group them in a new field of inquiry called ‘nanoethics’ (arguing that what the novel ethical issues ‘have in common in virtue of their being ‘nano’ is (if anything at all) insignificant’). White [51] and Johnson [22] also claim that nanomedicine raises ‘unique issues that require ethical scrutiny’, as well as arguing that we do not need any specific ‘subfield or discipline’ called ‘nanoethics’.

  4. See, for example, Allhoff ([3]: W1) ‘We need to acknowledge the possibility of ethical novelty’.

  5. See also, for example, McGee [32].

  6. See also Ferrari [13]. In the context of information and communication technology (ICT), Tavani [46] similarly distinguishes between the claim that new moral issues appeared in ICT and the claim that new moral principles are needed in ICT. He argues that the claims are not mutually implicit.

  7. On this point, see [17]. They are among the few who ask when it is that an ethical problem is new. In their opinion, ‘the answer depends greatly on the level of abstraction with which one analyses a particular ethical issue’; they thus conclude that ‘to a large extent the question of novelty is a pseudo-problem’ (ivi: 407). Although I agree when they say that we do not need to prove that nanotechnology gives rise to certain new ethical problems in order to confirm that we have compelling reasons to pursue research in nanoethics, I have demonstrated (1) that we cannot do without the distinction between ‘a new ethical problem’ and ‘merely a new occurrence of an old ethical problem’, and (2) that we can draw the distinction independently from the level of abstraction.

  8. Toth-Fejel ([48]: 12) agrees that ‘nanotechnology rarely raises any substantively new concerns; it only changes the context in which those concerns are realized’; however, he also suggests that nanotechnology may give rise to new ethical problems, his argument being merely that ‘differences in degree may be transferred into differences in kind – with unforeseen ethical implications’. Clearly we would need a non-arbitrary way of determining ‘the tipping point between degree and kind’; unfortunately, Toth-Fejel leaves us in the dark in that respect. For a similar point, see McGee [32]. Hopefully my definition of ‘a new ethical problem’ enables us to distinguish in a non-arbitrary fashion between ‘a new ethical problem’ and ‘a new occurrence of a non-new ethical problem’. For more about the argument that ethical concerns are manifest to drastically different degrees through nanotechnology, see Allhoff [1].

  9. Indeed, Sandler himself appears uncertain whether to consider them as genuinely new problems. He writes that even if they ‘are in a general sense familiar, they often will be quite novel in the particular’, and that ‘they involve significantly novel instantiations’ ([42]: 16) – we could easily interpret this as maintaining that they are merely new occurrences of old problems. However, he also says that ‘in addition to raising a broad array of familiar issues in novel forms, some nanomedical technologies have the potential to raise unfamiliar (or, at least, less familiar) issues, since they have the potential to challenge the basic evaluative framework for medicine’ (ivi: 17). In my view it is clear from this statement that he feels bound to consider them as new primarily because of his belief that they can significantly reconstitute our general ethical frameworks. Hopefully, I am offering a solution that allows them to be viewed as both challenging and non-new.

References

  1. Allhoff F (2007) On the autonomy and justification of nanoethics. NanoEthics 1:185–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allhoff F (2009) The coming era of nanomedicine. Am J Bioeth 9(10):3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allhoff F (2009) Response to open peer commentaries on “the coming era of nanomedicine”. Am J Bioeth 9(10):W1–W2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Allhoff F, Lin P (2006) What’s so special about nanotechnology and nanoethics? Int J Appl Philos 20(2):179–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ball P (2003, December 23) Nanotechnology in the firing line, Nanotechweb.org. Retrieved April 1, 2013 from http://nanotechweb.org/cws/article/indepth/18804

  6. Bensaude-Vincent B (2010) Opening the field of nanoethics: editorial introduction. Hyle 16(1):1–2

    Google Scholar 

  7. Braunack-Mayer AJ (2001) What makes a problem an ethical problem? An empirical perspective on the nature of ethical problems in general practice. J Med Ethics 27:98–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brownsword R (2008) Rights, regulation, and the technological revolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Brownsword R (2009) Nanoethics: old wine, new bottles? J Consum Policy 32(4):355–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dupuy J-P (2007) Some pitfalls in the philosophical foundations of nanoethics. J Med Philos 32:237–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Descartes R (1640) Responsio authoris ad primas objectiones. (In Ch. Adam & P. Tannery (Eds.), (1964–1974) , René Descartes. Oeuvres, 11 vols., Paris: Vrin)

  12. Ebbesen M, Andersen S, Besenbacher F (2006) Ethics in nanotechnology: starting to scratch? Bulletin of Science. Technol Soc 26(6):451–462

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ferrari A (2010) Developments in the debate on nanoethics: traditional approaches and the need for new kinds of analysis. NanoEthics 4:27–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ferrari A, Nordmann A (2010) Beyond conversation: some lessons for nanoethics. NanoEthics 4:171–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fischer E (2007) The convergence of nanotechnology, policy, and ethics. Adv Comput 71:273–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Godman M (2008) But is it unique to nanotechnology? Sci Eng Ethics 14:391–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gordijn B, de Vries R, O’Mathúna D (2011) Ethical issues in nanotechnology. In: Chadwick R, ten Have H, Maslin EM (eds) The Sage handbook of health care ethics. Sage, London, pp 402–412

    Google Scholar 

  18. Grunwald A (2005) Nanotechnology – a new field of ethical inquiry? Sci Eng Ethics 11:187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hansson SO (2004) Great uncertainty about small things. Techné Res Philos Technol 8(2):S26–S35

    Google Scholar 

  20. Holm S (2005) Does nanotechnology require a new “nanoethics”? Cardiff Centre for Ethics, Law and Society, August 2005. Retrieved April 1, 2013 from http://www.ccels.cf.ac.uk/archives/issues/2005/

  21. Johnson DG (2007) Ethics and technology ‘in the making’: an essay on the challenge of nanoethics. NanoEthics 1:21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnson S (2009) The era of nanomedicine and nanoethics: has it come, is it still coming, or will it pass us by? Am J Bioeth 9(10):2–3

    Google Scholar 

  23. Keiper A (2007) Nanoethics as a discipline? The New Atlantis, Spring 2007. Retrieved April 1, 2013 from http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/nanoethics-as-a-discipline

  24. Kermisch C (2012) Do new ethical issues arise at each stage of nanotechnological development? NanoEthics 6:29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Khushf G (2004) The ethics of nanotechnology: vision and values for a new generation of science and engineering. (In The National Academy of Engineering (Ed.), Emerging Technologies and Ethical Issues in Engineering (pp. 29–55). Washington: National Academies Press)

  26. Kuiken T (2011) Nanomedicine and ethics: is there anything new or unique? Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology 3(2):111–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lenk C, Biller-Andorno N (2007) Nanomedicine-emerging or re-emerging ethical issues? A discussion of four ethical themes. Med Health Care Philos 10:173–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lewenstein BV (2011) What counts as a ‘social and ethical issue’ in nanotechnology? Hyle, 11, 1, 5–18. In: Schummer J, Baird D (eds) Nanotechnology challenges: implications for philosophy, ethics, and society. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, pp 201–216

    Google Scholar 

  29. Litton P (2007) “Nanoethics”? What’s new? Hast Cent Rep 37(1):22–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. MacDonald C (2004) Nanotech is novel; the ethical issues are not. The Scientist 18:3

    Google Scholar 

  31. MacDonald C, Williams-Jones B (2012) Nothing new (ethically) under the sun: policy and clinical implications of nanomedicine. Bioéthique Online, 1. Retrieved April 1, 2013 from bioethiqueonline.ca/publications/articles

  32. McGee EM (2009) Nanomedicine: ethical concerns beyond diagnostics, drugs, and techniques. Am J Bioeth 9(10):14–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McGinn R (2010) What’s different, ethically, about nanotechnology? Foundational questions and answers. NanoEthics 4:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Moor JH (2005) Why we need better ethics for emerging technologies. Ethics and Information Technology, 7, 111–119. In: van den Hoven J, Weckert J (eds) Information technology and moral philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 26–39

    Google Scholar 

  35. Nurock V (2008) Avons-nous vraiment besoin de ‘nano-éthique’? In: Bensaude-Vincent B, Larrère R, Nurock V (eds) Bionano-éthique: regards critiques sur les nanotechnologies. Vuibert, Paris, pp 113–127

    Google Scholar 

  36. Nurock V (2010) Nanoethics: ethics for, from, or with nanotechnologies? Hyle 16(1):31–42

    Google Scholar 

  37. Preston CJ (2005) The promise and threat of nanotechnology. Hyle 11:19–44

    Google Scholar 

  38. Queraltó R (2013) Ethics as a beneficial Trojan horse in a technological society. Sci Eng Ethics 19:13–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rieder TN (2008) Book review of Fritz Allhoff and Patrick Lin (eds): Nanotechnology and society: current and emergent ethical issues. NanoEthics, 2, 329–331

  40. Roco MC (2011) The long view of nanotechnology development: the national nanotechnology initiative at 10 years. J Nanoparticles Res 13:427–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Royal Society & Royal Academy of Engineering (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. Retrieved April 1, 2013 from http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm

  42. Sandler R (2009) Nanomedicine and nanomedical ethics. Am J Bioeth 9(10):16–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Spagnolo A, Daloiso V (2008) Outlining ethical issues in nanotechnologies. Bioethics 23(7):394–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sparrow R (2009) The social impacts of nanotechnology: an ethical and political analysis. Bioeth Inq 6:13–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Swierstra S, Rip A (2007) Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. NanoEthics 1:3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Tavani HT (2002) The uniqueness debate in computer ethics: what exactly is at issue, and why does it matter? Ethics Inf Technol 4:37–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Tiefenauer LX (2006) Ethics of nanotechnology in medicine. NanoBiotechnology 2:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Toth-Fejel T (2009) Nanotechnology will change more than just one thing. Am J Bioeth 9(10):12–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Van de Poel I (2008) How should we do nanoethics? a network approach for discerning ethical issues in nanotechnology. NanoEthics 2:25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Varzi A (2011) On doing ontology without metaphysics. Philos Perspect 25:407–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. White GB (2009) Missing the boat of nanoethics. Am J Bioeth 9(10):18–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments that greatly contributed to improving the final version of the paper, and the Editors for their generous support during the review process. He also wishes to thank Regione Autonoma della Sardegna, Italy, for supporting his investigation through grant number CRP 1_455 (L.R. 7/2007).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Applied Epistemology, DADU, University of Sassari, piazza Duomo 6, 07041, Alghero, SS, Italy

    Fabio Bacchini

  2. CNRS-EHESS-ENS, Institut Jean Nicod, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75005, Paris, France

    Fabio Bacchini

Authors
  1. Fabio Bacchini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fabio Bacchini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bacchini, F. Is Nanotechnology Giving Rise to New Ethical Problems?. Nanoethics 7, 107–119 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-013-0179-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-013-0179-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation