Moral and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology - Report Example

Moral and Ethical Implications of Na chnology “Na chnology is the art and science of making very minute things that used to creates very minutes things” (Lupton, 2011). The term refers to both process of making those minute things in nanometer scale and those very tiny things made using that process. The essence of nanotechnology is to enable human being to dismantle objects into constituent molecules and reassemble them into other life forms with desired characteristics such as low cost, durable, etc. (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). The objects create through nanotechnology are artificial that have essential components with nanoscale dimensions and exhibiting unique property from the one it would have at microscale level (Schummer, 2007). As the process of creating molecular things and the product of that technology, nanotechnology has potential to influence various aspects of human lives and the environment both negatively and positively (Lupton, 2011). The use of nanotechnology can help people to create and to disassemble objects at molecular level thus is making it possible to do anything to satisfy human needs (Schummer, 2007). This document focuses on moral and ethical issues posed by nanotechnology. Although the technology is undergoing research, there is little that has been done to establish moral and ethical issues it poses and the approaches to mitigate the negative impacts of that technology. Nanotechnology is being used in various aspects of human lives such as in sporting paraphernalia, clothing, cosmetics, electronics, etc. (Crowe, 200). Since they are in molecular form, there is high chance that nanoparticles penetrate the human body through skin and by inhalation and find their way to the brain through the bloodstream (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). Unlike larger particles that accumulate in the lungs nanoparticles are very tiny to the extent they can permeate through barrier separating brain and the blood thus they easily get into the brain (Lupton, 2011). Since the presence of foreign materials in the brain has severe consequences there is a high probability that nanoparticles will affect human beings adversely (Schummer, 2007). Of course, this is an issue warranting thorough research on the likely consequences of accumulation of nanoparticles in the human body especially in mass quantity after the technology has been fully adopted (Nurock, 2010). The stakeholders should take moral responsibility to establish both short-term and long-term consequences of nanoparticles on the human body and the environment and devise means of alleviating undesired outcome before that technology becomes acceptable (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). Nanotechnology is a new technology that is still undergoing developments. “There is little research that has been conducted regarding the current or future consequences on human health, economic, environmental, etc.” (Nurock, 2010). There is no data available for analyzing cost and benefits of nanotechnology on human beings or the environment, and that might have hindered effective assessment of moral and ethical consequences of the technology (Crowe, 200). Apart from the issue of underdevelopment of technology, lack of appropriate techniques for assessing the impact of the technology exposure on environment and human life are responsible for inadequate data for conducting analysis (Schummer, 2007). Furthermore, lack of coordination and moral authority among the stakeholders to conduct an evaluation of potential risks using particular nanomaterials pose limitations on effective risk assessment (Lupton, 2011). However, just like any other technology in the world nanotechnology has many potential challenges on human and the environment thus posing severe moral and ethical implications in the society. There has been argument that nanotechnology makes it possible for scientists to dismantle any matter and build or assemble it in a different form (Lupton, 2011). They can bring an object into existence at molecular lever thus altering the normal appearance of objects. This might result to the distortion on fundamental building blocks of matter with a possibility that human being may not be able to understand the matter in the way they are used to (Schummer, 2007). Should that happen then human beings will be in full control of matter. The creation of new matter and dismantling of the existing matter might cause unprecedented consequences especially that may affect the mechanisms of coping with lives (Lupton, 2011). That issue has raised the moral question regarding the appropriateness of using such technology and what it aims to achieve in order to warrant its implementation despite the possible consequences (Nurock, 2010). It may be morally wrong for scientists to alter the components of the matter thus making it hard for people to understand themselves or the nature. Human being needs to understand their being and appreciate the supreme beings (Lupton, 2011). Human genome if the component of inheritance and establishes a relationship between the ancestors and the living generations. It is the essence of life that makes people determine their relatives from those whom they have no relationship at all (Crowe, 200). Therefore, it is immoral for human beings to change the pattern of life and cause confusion about the way they came into existence. The development of nanotechnology was meant to make life simple for all human beings, for instance, by creating more products easily, simplifying the treatment process, generating cheap products, etc. (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). However, there is a high probability that such technology might be misused to the detriment of the human being. Such technology might be used by terrorist to advance their activities thus resulting to human suffering (Nurock, 2010). For example, one of the ways in which nanoparticles has been used in the treatment of diabetes. Nanoparticles have made it possible for the body to ingest insulin in a pill form as opposed to injection. However, the use of nanoparticles to pave the way for foreign bodies to get into someone’s body could be detrimental to the health of that person if used unfairly (Sandler, 2009). For instance, the deadly pathogens such as those causing Ebola (Ebola-Zaire) could be possibly bound in the nanoparticles and then circulated in the air by terrorists to cause harm to the people (Schummer, 2007). The possibility of spreading pathogens through, minute particles in the air could be extremely dangerous to human lives (Lupton, 2011). Furthermore, it is possible to make harmful particles from readily available materials using nanotechnology thus making the technology a serious threat to human lives (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). Therefore, it is unethical to risk the lives of the people by developing nanotechnology that might be hijack by terrorists to spread their activities especially given there are no adequate regulations in place to determine to hold anybody responsible for those consequences (Lupton, 2011). Nanotechnology might demean human dignity due to the consequences it may have on their lives (Schummer, 2007). Human being is a special creation and is brought into existence through biological process. The human life is upheld with dignity and in a special way that distinguishes human beings from other animals or objects (Crowe, 200). The body parts of the human beings are supposed to be maintained at their optimal functions without modifications or enhancement of any kind. This is due to the fact that human being is considered a special creation of God and He only can change the form of human life (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). The use of nanotechnology involves physical, chemical and biological processes that can alter human life in various forms. For example, the technology is likely to integrate human brain with computer microchip in order to enhance the memory status. The technology is likely to be used to modify other aspects of human life such as to prolong the lifespan, manipulate the body size, reproduce offspring at micromolecular level using the technology, etc. (Lupton, 2011). These manipulations of the human body and their functions will reduce human beings into a mere object. The technology will put the creation power at the disposal of mankind and result to emergence of various life forms that would otherwise not have existed by integrating components of various life forms to establish new life forms (Schummer, 2007). The technology should uphold the sanctity and integrity of the human genome that constitute the fundamentals of human inheritance (Nurock, 2010). No human being has moral power to bring life into existence or dismantle any life since that is the role of God. Although nanotechnology is at a developmental phase, there has not been any concern on the full impact it will have on the people or environment (Crowe, 200). There are no legislations that have been enacted to direct on how it will be implemented or who will be held responsible for the adverse consequences that technology may have at present and in the future (Sandler, 2009). The US government has been actively engaged in funding research activities to develop nanotechnology. Research institutions such as Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF) have applied various techniques such as microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), fiber optics, biotechnology, etc. to advance knowledge on nanotechnology. Also, learning institutions such as Northwestern University and the University of Washington have created research centers for nanotechnology (Lupton, 2011). However, despite the effort of various institutions and the US government to develop nanotechnology there has been very little or no effort at all to research on the consequences of that technology on human lives and the environment (Chen, n.d.). It is morally wrong for the government and other institutions to express a lot of interest on something that is likely to affect human life and the environment adversely without putting up regulations to guide on the issue or even establish the consequences of that technology both in short-term and long-term. The use of nanotechnology can wreck havoc in the globe in case the technology is misapplied. For example, nanomachines have capacity to replicate and can be used as weapons capable of cause massive destruction of life. Nanotechnology can result to uncontrolled production of guns, missiles, explosives, etc. that can cause severe destruction in the world. The technology will leave physical structures and biological organisms at the discretion of the armies and in case any of the disassembler gets loose they can dismantle all the structures at molecular level (Chen, n.d.). Furthermore, nanotechnology can result to intrusion of privacy since individuals can use molecular microphones, cameras, etc. to monitor others thus breaching individual privacy. In addition, illegal objects with the size of molecules can pass the security check since they cannot be detected easily thus resulting to increase in terrorism and other criminal activities (Lupton, 2011). Therefore, it is unethical to introduce nanotechnology that is likely to cause such havoc and breach of individual privacy without putting adequate measures in place to control how the technology is implemented (Crowe, 200). Furthermore, there are no regulations putting moral authority on anyone to control the society against moral consequences of implementing nanotechnology. People depend on various economic activities for livelihood (Sandler, 2009). However, introduction of nanotechnology will impact the economic activities and the trade activities across the globe. Some of the notable changes will be a massive production of goods by organizations that can afford to pay for the technology (Nano Research Facility, n.d.). It might create a new dispensation of the industrial revolution that may render the existing production system obsolete. Among the devastating repercussions it may have is that it may render industrial workers jobless (Nurock, 2010). Therefore, it would be unethical and immoral to introduce such technology that would have detrimental effects on many workers without any proper arrangement on how those workers can be compensated. The governments should work for the interest of all people thus; they should avoid taking decision that can have detrimental effects on many people (Lupton, 2011). The other issue would be regarding the motivation factors for work since people would be able to produce everything they need at molecular level. The stakeholders should determine the ones with moral responsibility to assist other people and ensure no one suffers as a result of the introduction of nanotechnology. Moreover, nanotechnology is capable of prolonging the lives of the people by replacing aging cells (Sandler, 2009). If such a thing was to happen, it would have severe implications on the lives of the people especially due to potential for some people to live hundreds or thousands of years (Chen, n.d.). But if that was to happen there would be severe ethical and moral implications. For example, the first issue would be in regard to accessibility of the services. It would be unethical for some people to enjoy longer lives while others cannot afford or access that technology (Crowe, 200). Also, it would be devastating as the population would escalate to an uncontrollable level. Particles of same chemical level exhibit different characteristics depending on their shape and size in nanometer range (Lupton, 2011). The characteristics variations include electromagnetic, catalytic, biological, etc. as well as their movement in the environment and through biological membranes. However, despite the varying characteristics the regulatory authority responsible for chemicals and consumer products and those implementing safety regulations disregard the impact of size and shape on the properties while they focus their interests on the chemical composition (Chen, n.d.). The implication of effects of size and shape on chemical characteristics of matter is that nanoparticles can pass the screening test undetected despite having same properties with bigger particles of the same matter (Crowe, 200). Therefore, use of nanotechnology may result to insecurity issues since the regulatory bodies may not provide consumers with the safety they deserve. It is unethical to adopt a technology that does not guarantee the consumers of the safety they deserve (Sandler, 2009). When new technology is introduced, it brings desirable and undesirable consequences to the public and to the environment (Chen, n.d.). Nanotechnology not being an exceptional has a high chance of creating implications on the environment. Before its adoption, there is a need to conduct thorough environment assessment in order to establish the likely consequences of such technology (Sandler, 2009). In case the environmental audit establishes the detrimental consequences the environmental regulatory authority should determine the extent of the negative impact on the environment and devise means to compensate those who suffer. In addition, those responsible for implementing the technology should come up with a roadmap for mitigating the negative consequences it imposes (Crowe, 200). Another ethical issue with nanotechnology is in regard to how that technology will generate benefits to all people. In conclusion nanotechnology has potential to change life positively and negatively. The use of this technology raises moral concern because it will give human beings supernatural powers to create and dismantle matter thus changing their current form the power supposed to be applied by God. The technology may result to breach of individual privacy, uncontrolled production of destructive weapons, etc. Nanotechnology is likely to prolong the lives of the people since it helps in manipulating the body cells and create new cells. There is the probability for creating all the resources people may need from cheap materials such as garbage thus improving their living standards. The issue is how those benefits can be shared by all people in order to avoid benefitting a few individuals who can afford to pay for the technology. It is unethical for a few people to benefit from the technology while others continue to suffer thus the technology should improve the lives of all people. The stakeholders should set up regulations to direct the establishment and implementation of the technology in order to enable people to enjoy the projected benefits and minimize the perceived consequences. References Chen, A. (n.d.). Ethical Issues & Analysis. Retrieved August 16, 2014, from Http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/chen/nanotechnology.html Crowe, S. (200). Understanding the Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology. Retrieved August 16, 2014, from https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcbe/ background/nanotechnology_implications.html Lupton, M. (2011). The social, moral & ethical issues raised by nanotechnology in the field of medicine. Med Law, 30(2):187-200. Retrieved on August 16, 2014 from, Http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21877465 Nano Research Facility.(n.d.).Societal and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology. Retrieved August 16, 2014, from Http://www.nano.wustl.edu/doc/Forms/NRF%20Nano%20Ethics.pdf Nurock, V. (2010). Nanoethics: Ethics For, From, or With Nanotechnologies? Retrieved August 16, 2014 from, http://www.hyle.org/journal/issues/16-1/ nurock.pdf Sandler, R. (2009). Nanotechnology: The Social and Ethical Issues. Retrieved August 16, 2014, from Http://www.nanotechproject.org/process/assets/files/7060/nano_pen16_final.pdf Schummer, J. (2007). Identifying Ethical Issues of Nanotechnologies. Retrieved on August 16, 2014 from Http://www.joachimschummer.net/papers/2007_Nanoethics_UNESCO.pdf Read More