Morally Contentious Technology-Field Intersections: The Case of Biotechnology in the United States [Book Review]

Journal of Business Ethics 115 (3):555-574 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Technologies can be not only contentious—overthrowing existing ways of doing things—but also morally contentious—forcing deep reflection on personal values and societal norms. This article investigates that what may impede the acceptance of a technology and/or the development of the field that supports or exploits it, the lines between which often become blurred in the face of morally contentious content. Using a unique dataset with historically important timing—the United States Biotechnology Study fielded just 9 months after the public announcement of the successful cloning of the first mammal (i.e., Dolly the sheep)—we find that microlevel factors (i.e., conservative Christianity) predict unfavorable judgments of the technology-field intersection while macrolevel representations [i.e., exposure to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics disciplines and media coverage] predict more favorable judgments.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,127

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Emerging Field of Biotechnology— The Case of Finland.Jukka Varelius & Osmo Kivinen - 2003 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 28 (1):141-161.
Policy Cultures: The Case of Science Policy in the United States.Kenneth P. Ruscio - 1994 - Science, Technology and Human Values 19 (2):205-222.
From Biotechnology to Nanotechnology: What Can We Learn from Earlier Technologies?Michael D. Mehta - 2004 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 24 (1):34-39.
A Framework for Thawing Value Conflicts in the GMO Debate.Samantha Noll - 2020 - In Shannon Vallor (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Technology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Usa. pp. 50-90.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-08-07

Downloads
12 (#1,115,280)

6 months
26 (#116,274)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
Pandora’s hope.Bruno Latour - 1999 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Minds, Brains, and Programs.John Searle - 2003 - In John Heil (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 25 references / Add more references