Hastings Cent Rep. 2017 Jul;47 Suppl 2:S54-S59. doi: 10.1002/hast.753.
We live amidst the sixth great extinction of life on Earth, and we live under the sign of molecular biology and biotechnology. An ethical maxim that is well-nigh universally acknowledged holds that with great power comes great moral responsibility. For those who accept the science and embrace the responsibility, there are two rather different kinds of moral vision and moral imagination at work. Detractors of biotechnology say that we should see ourselves as creaturely good citizens of the biotic community, accepting and accommodating what evolutionary natural selection has bequeathed to us, warts and all. Boosters of biotechnology say that we should see ourselves as its sovereigns, fashioning better forms of synthetic life and genetically driving evolution in better ways through anthropogenic selection. Faced with biodiversity loss, technology boosters, or eco-modernists, tend to respond by upping the ante on technology in hopes of increasing the benefits and lessening the impact of human relations with nature. The detractors, or eco-communitarians, respond by seeking to restructure the relationship between humans and nature by lowering the profile of human power so as to hear the voice of nonhuman being and better attune ourselves to it. Undergirding both of these moral visions is atonement. As a way of providing atonement, however, de-extinction fails.
我们生活在地球生命的第六次大灭绝之中，生活在分子生物学和生物技术的时代。一个几乎被普遍认可的伦理格言是，权力越大，道德责任越大。对于那些接受科学并承担责任的人来说，有两种截然不同的道德视野和道德想象力在起作用。生物技术的诋毁者说，我们应该把自己看作是生物群落中具有生物性的好公民，接受并适应进化自然选择赋予我们的一切，包括所有的瑕疵。生物技术的支持者则说，我们应该把自己看作是它的主宰者，通过人为选择，塑造更好的合成生命形式，并以更好的方式引导遗传进化。面对生物多样性的丧失，技术的支持者，或者生态现代主义者，往往会通过提高技术的赌注来做出回应，希望增加人类与自然的关系的好处，减少其影响。诋毁者，或者生态共同体主义者，则通过寻求降低人类权力的形象来重构人类与自然的关系，以便听到非人类存在的声音，并更好地与之协调。这两种道德愿景都以下面这句话为基础：赎罪。然而，作为一种赎罪的方式，灭绝后重生的做法并不可行。
