Difference between revisions of "Team:Grenoble-Alpes/HP/Gold Integrated"

Revision as of 16:45, 29 October 2017

When the fall comes, the landscapes that groove the road to the Galibier completely change colors.
Credits: Estelle Vincent

Synthetic biology is an emergent field raising many ethical questions. In this context, we organised a conference about ethics in synthetic biology, which was led by Mr Thierry Menissier, director of the doctoral school n°487 “Philosophy, History, Representations, Creation » and responsible of the Management of innovation Master. Synthetic biology is defined as a discipline which is halfway between biology and engineering, innovation is at its heart and it is an essential part of it. For Claude Birraux and Jean Yves Le Déaut, innovation is being able to integrate top of the line knowledge at a given moment in a given product or service, aiming at assessing a desire expressed by the people or the society as a whole. This definition can be linked to the political thinking of the Parliament’s members and is therefore somewhat reassuring but also incomplete and restrictive.

From a philosophical point of view, innovation can be defined as the Human capability to destroy philosophical and scientific dogmas, on which ruins it builds new and innovative ideas.

For Thierry Menissier, the conference lecturer, innovation should not be confused with progress. He defines innovation as a post-progressist concept. To him, progress consists of a general evolution and a buildup of rational knowledge that can guide us to happiness. Today he acknowledges that there is a misconception around the idea of progress in the societies driven by technology as they have grown dependent of it and are petrified at the idea that it might suddenly stop.

As we face this crisis, it is important to engage in a reflexion about how to substitute innovation to progress. To this end, we must be able to link technological innovation and the socio-moral strengths that can justify it and give it the impulse it needs in our society. To achieve this, several factors must be taken into account, such as the precaution and the responsibility principles.

Mr. Menissier carried out a survey among students studying human and social sciences asking them about their perception of synthetic biology and genetic editing, coming to the conclusion that 55% of them were afraid of it, 35% were scared but would have felt safe if they knew that the experiments were controlled, and the rest abstained from answering. This demonstrates that scientific innovation in synthetic biology cannot be done without a profound ethical reflexion first.

In the day to day work of a researcher, it is important to distinguish the many normativities by which its work is regulated (regulations and prescriptions, laws, deontology, moral, religion, ethic), be sensible to the eventual conflict that might rise between them and make use of morality to assess any tension.

According to Mr. Menissier it is necessary to let the scientist innovate but at the condition that he also envisions the place his innovation will occupy in our society and nature. Innovation must be given a role in the ethical assessment of innovations.

As innovation comes as the result of several factors, Thierry Menissier asks for a prospective ethic to those who play a key role in innovation. To his mind, the ethical actions of a biologist or any researcher in general must undergo two crucial steps:

the first one consists of making clear who are the different actors (researchers, funders, developers, users and the environment)

the second one would be to draw the picture of their interests. It is therefore a global vision that would be needed to have a reflexion on ethics about innovation in the world of the living.

As a conclusion to this conference, Mr. Menissier insisted on the importance of pluri disciplinarity while reflecting on ethics. In his opinion, progress is only defined by dynamically confronting these diverse interest.