"
Team:Paris/Ethics ethicalreport
From 2009.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Christophe.R (Talk | contribs) |
Christophe.R (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | <span/ id="bottom">[https://2009.igem.org/ iGEM ] > [[Team:Paris#top | Paris]] > [[Team:Paris/Ethics_ethicallabbook#top | Ethic]] > [[Team:Paris/ | + | <span/ id="bottom">[https://2009.igem.org/ iGEM ] > [[Team:Paris#top | Paris]] > [[Team:Paris/Ethics_ethicallabbook#top | Ethic]] > [[Team:Paris/Ethics_ethicalreport#bottom | Ethical Report]] >[[Team:Paris/Ethics_ethicalreport#bottom | Main]] |
{{Template:Paris2009}} | {{Template:Paris2009}} | ||
{{Template:Paris2009_menu5}} | {{Template:Paris2009_menu5}} | ||
Revision as of 23:28, 19 October 2009
iGEM > Paris > Ethic > Ethical Report > Main
The Paris team ethical and sociological report
- Preface
- Methods
- Introduction
- A.Perspectives from the field of ethics : polyphony and the moral imperative.
- B.Perspectives from the scientific field : considering the social world.
- I.Biosafety and biosecurity concerns
- A. Biosafety
- B. Biosecurity
- II. Naturality and Artificiality.
- A. From “what” do we have to protect nature?
- B. Performing Lexicon : The playing God issue?
- C. A false question? ...
- D. … An ironical answer
- E. What “real question”? : Practices and alienability of the living.
- F. Conclusion
- III. Practices
- A. What form for what life science?
- B. Self or Exploded governance?
- C. Forms of critics
- D. To finish with... A case study
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- References
- Appendices: Reports of the collective discussion in the team : Real time ethical reflexion.
