Nanoethics without nano-opinions?

Filed in archive Society & Ethics on January 11, 2006

Some organizations advocate for nanotechnology, others oppose it, and some try to straddle the fence. The Nanoethics Group is one such organization that studies the ethical and societal implications of nanotechnology. They bill themselves as, " a non-partisan and independent research and education organization - not an advocacy, activist or watchdog group. "

" What makes us different, " they say, " is that, where other organizations have already made up their minds either for or against nanotechnology, or are tied to certain interests, we have no agenda other than to keep an open mind and go where analysis & common sense lead us. "

But how can anyone who has studied nanotechnology for years not have made up their minds yet either for or against it? If one of the group' s researchers forms an opinion either for or against nanotech are they immediately shown the door, or must they keep their opinions secret? Does the group have the ethical equivalent of drug testing, quizzing its employees every few months to make sure they haven' t made up their minds?

Their aims are undoubtedly admirable. As they say, " By proactively opening a dialogue about the possible misuses and unintended consequences of nanotechnology, the industry can avoid the mistakes that others have made repeatedly in business, most recently in the biotech sector - ignoring the issues, reacting too late and losing the critical battle of public opinion. "

And this betrays their true bias: to help industry win the " critical battle of public opinion " . This aim assumes, as do most nanotechnology advocates, that nanotech is a virtuous endeavor that simply needs to avoid the " mistakes " of bad public relations in order to succeed. Nanotech opponents argue vehemently against this kind of assumption by posing an alternative path by which public opinion should determine whether or not nanotechnology should be pursued at all.

To the group' s credit, opponents favoring a moratorium on nanotechnology are few and far between, and the assumption that nanotechnology will forge ahead regardless of public opinion is, unfortunately, a safe one. Organizations like the Nanoethics Group play an important role in educating a public which, while it will almost certainly not bring a halt to nanotechnology, can and must have a voice in the course of its development.