Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep;19(3):963-81. doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9419-y. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
In their 2007 paper, Swierstra and Rip identify characteristic tropes and patterns of moral argumentation in the debate about the ethics of new and emerging science and technologies (or "NEST-ethics"). Taking their NEST-ethics structure as a starting point, we considered the debate about tissue engineering (TE), and argue what aspects we think ought to be a part of a rich and high-quality debate of TE. The debate surrounding TE seems to be predominantly a debate among experts. When considering the NEST-ethics arguments that deal directly with technology, we can generally conclude that consequentialist arguments are by far the most prominently featured in discussions of TE. In addition, many papers discuss principles, rights and duties relevant to aspects of TE, both in a positive and in a critical sense. Justice arguments are only sporadically made, some "good life" arguments are used, others less so (such as the explicit articulation of perceived limits, or the technology as a technological fix for a social problem). Missing topics in the discussion, at least from the perspective of NEST-ethics, are second "level" arguments-those referring to techno-moral change connected to tissue engineering. Currently, the discussion about tissue engineering mostly focuses on its so-called "hard impacts"-quantifiable risks and benefits of the technology. Its "soft impacts"-effects that cannot easily be quantified, such as changes to experience, habits and perceptions, should receive more attention.
在他们 2007 年的论文中，Swierstra 和 Rip 确定了新出现的科学和技术（或“NEST-ethics”）伦理辩论中道德论证的特征比喻和模式。以他们的 NEST-ethics 结构为起点，我们考虑了组织工程学（TE）的争论，并认为我们认为哪些方面应该成为 TE 丰富和高质量辩论的一部分。围绕 TE 的争论似乎主要是专家之间的争论。当考虑直接涉及技术的 NEST-ethics 论点时，我们通常可以得出结论，后果主义论点是讨论 TE 时最突出的特征。此外，许多论文从积极和批判的角度讨论了与 TE 相关的原则、权利和义务。正义论点只是零星提出的，一些“美好生活”论点被使用，其他论点则较少（例如明确阐述感知到的限制，或技术作为解决社会问题的技术手段）。从 NEST-ethics 的角度来看，讨论中至少缺少第二个“层次”的论点——那些与组织工程相关的技术道德变化的论点。目前，关于组织工程的讨论主要集中在其所谓的“硬影响”——技术的可量化风险和收益上。其“软影响”——无法轻易量化的影响，例如经验、习惯和认知的变化，应该引起更多关注。
