"
Team:Paris/Ethics ethicalreport
From 2009.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Christophe.R (Talk | contribs) (→The Paris team ethical and sociological report) |
Cha.olivier (Talk | contribs) (→The Paris team ethical and sociological report) |
||
| Line 142: | Line 142: | ||
*[[Team:Paris/EthicalReportReferences| References]] | *[[Team:Paris/EthicalReportReferences| References]] | ||
*[[Team:Paris/EthicalReportAppendices| Appendices: Reports of the collective discussion in the team : Real time ethical reflexion.]] | *[[Team:Paris/EthicalReportAppendices| Appendices: Reports of the collective discussion in the team : Real time ethical reflexion.]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | {{Template:Paris2009_guided|Brainstorm_ideafourthweek#bottom.23top|EthicalReportPreface#bottom}} | ||
Latest revision as of 15:46, 21 October 2009
iGEM > Paris > Ethics > 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.
