Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Logo Thémata

RESEARCH PAPERS

No. 64

From Instrumentalism to Critical Theory of Technology: An Alternative Framework for Bioethics of the CRISPR/Cas Revolution

DOI
https://doi.org/10.12795/themata.2021.i64.06
Submitted
June 14, 2021
Published
2021-12-26

Abstract

In this article we analyze and problematize the way in which mainstream bioethics conceptualizes the gene editing technology known as CRISPR/Cas. Against the prevalent instrumentalist vision, we argue that critical theory of technology offers a more adequate framework for fully comprehending the ethical implications of the CRISPR/Cas technological revolution that we are experiencing. Our conclusions point to the fact that the way bioethics conceives technology impacts on the reflections and types of interventions that become possible, promoting thereby new approaches for bioethics based on alternative ways of understanding the technological dimension.

References

  1. Baltimore, David y otros. "Statement by the Organizing Committee of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing", 2018. https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2018/11/statement-by-the-organizing-committee-of-the-second-international-summit-on-human-genome-editing. Ultimo Acceso: 11 Junio 2021.
  2. Barrangou, Rodolphe. “Thinking About CRISPR: The Ethics of Human Genome Editing”, The CRISPR Journal 2/5 (2019): 247-248.
  3. Barrangou, Rodolphe y Jennifer Doudna. “Applications of CRISPR technologies in research and beyond”, Nature Biotechnology 34/9 (2016): 933-941.
  4. Bueno, Gustavo. ¿Qué es la Bioética? Oviedo: Pentalfa Ediciones, 2001.
  5. Charo, Alta. “Rogues and Regulation of Germline Editing”, The New England Journal of Medicine 380/10 (2019): 976-980.
  6. Cohen, Jon. “What now for human genome editing?”, Science 362/6419 (2018): 1090-1092.
  7. Davies, Kevin. “He Said What Now?”, The CRISPR Journal 1/6 (2018): 358-362.
  8. Dickenson, Donna y Marcy Darnovsky. “Did a permissive scientific culture encourage the ‘CRISPR babies’ experiment?”, Nature Biotechnology 37 (2019): 355-357.
  9. Doudna, Jennifer y Emmanuelle Charpentier. “The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9”, Science 346 (2014): 1258096.
  10. Doudna, Jennifer y Samuel Sternberg. A crack in creation: Gene editing and the unthinkable power to control evolution. Nueva York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2017.
  11. Feenberg, Andrew. Technosystem: The social Life of Reason. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2017.
  12. Feenberg, Andrew. Between Reason and Experience: Essays in Technology and Modernity. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2010.
  13. Feenberg, Andrew. Transforming technology: A Critical Theory Revisited. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
  14. González Valenzuela, Juliana. “Ética y Bioética”, Isegoría 27 (2002): 41-53.
  15. Gumer, Jennifer M. “The Wisdom of Germline Editing: An Ethical Analysis of the Use of CRISPR-Cas9 to Edit Human Embryos”, The New Bioethics 25/2 (2019): 137-152.
  16. Heidegger, Martin. The question concerning technology and other essays. Nueva York: Harper & Row, 1977.
  17. Hottois, Gilbert. El paradigma bioético: una ética para la tecnociencia, trad. Carmen Monge. Barcelona: Anthropos, 1991 [1990].
  18. Jinek, Martin y otros. “A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity”, Science 337 (2012): 816-821.
  19. Kleiderman, Erika y Ubaka Ogbogu. “Realigning Gene Editing and Bioscience Policy Discourse with Clinical Research Ethics: What the ‘CRISPR Twins’ Debacle Means for Chinese and International Research Ethics Governance”, Accountability in Research 26/4 (2019): 257-264.
  20. Krimsky, Sheldon. “Ten ways in which He Jiankui violated ethics”, Nature Biotechnology 37 (2019): 19-20.
  21. LaManna, Caroline M. y Rodolphe Barrangou. “Enabling the Rise of a CRISPR World”, The CRISPR Journal 1/3 (2018): 205-208.
  22. Lander, Eric y otros. “Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing”, Nature 567 (2019): 165-168.
  23. Linares, Jorge. Ética y Mundo Tecnológico. México D.F: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2008.
  24. Ma, Yuanwu, Lianfeng Zhang y Chuan Qin. “The first genetically gene‐edited babies: It's ‘irresponsible and too early’”, Animal Models and Experimental Medicine 2/1 (2019): 1-4.
  25. Marcuse, Herbert. El hombre unidimensional, trad. Antonio Elorza. Buenos Aires: Editorial Planeta, 2003 [1954].
  26. Mojica, Francisco J.M. y Lluis Montoliu. “On the Origin of CRISPR-Cas Technology: From Prokaryotes to Mammals”, Trends in Microbiology 24/10 (2016): 811-820.
  27. National Academy of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. Heritable human genome editing. Washington: The National Academies Press, 2020.
  28. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genome editing and human reproduction: Social and ethical issues. Londres: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2018.
  29. Pallitto, Nahuel y Guillermo Folguera. “Una alarma nada excepcional: CRISPR/Cas9 y la edición de la línea germinal en seres humanos”, BIOETHICS UPdate 6/1 (2020): 17-36.
  30. Saada. Alya. “Prólogo”. Diccionario Latinoamericano de Bioética, ed. Juan Carlos Tealdi. Bogotá: UNESCO - Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Bioética, 2008. xix-xxii.
  31. Saha, Krishanu y otros. “The NIH Somatic Cell Genome Editing program”, Nature 592/8 (2021): 195-204.
  32. Sheridan, Cormac. “Mammoth, Arbor and Beam launch new wave of CRISPR startups”, Nature Biotechnology 36/6 (2018): 479-480.
  33. Sternberg, Samuel y Jennifer Doudna. “Expanding the Biologist’s Toolkit with CRISPR-Cas9”, Molecular Cell 58 (2015): 568-574.
  34. Zhu, Haocheng, Chao Li y Caixia Gao. “Applications of CRISPR–Cas in agriculture and plant biotechnology”, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 21 (2020): 661-677.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.