Is nanotechnology morally acceptable?
For a significant percentage of Americans, the answer is no…
“There seem to be distinct differences between the United States and countries that are key players in nanotech in Europe, in terms of attitudes toward nanotechnology,” says Scheufele…
In a sample of 1,015 adult Americans, only 29.5 percent of respondents agreed that nanotechnology was morally acceptable. In European surveys that posed identical questions about nanotechnology to people in the United Kingdom and continental Europe, significantly higher percentages of people accepted the moral validity of the technology.
The catch for Americans with strong religious convictions, Scheufele believes, is that nanotechnology, biotechnology and stem cell research are lumped together as means to enhance human qualities. In short, researchers are viewed as “playing God” when they create materials that do not occur in nature, especially where nanotechnology and biotechnology intertwine, says Scheufele…
The new study has critical implications for how experts explain the technology and its applications, Scheufele says. It means the scientific community needs to do a far better job of placing the technology in context and in understanding the attitudes of the American public.
Or Americans might also be encouraged to learn beyond the suggested limits of their Stone Age geneset.
The solution is simple. Science must get down in the mud and MARKET ITSELF. Calling them “Angel Baseballs” would go a long way and hurt no ones dignity?
I hate spurious conclusion based on poor data. Maybe a simpler (non religious) explanation is that attitudes towards nano-technology are correlated with a countries level of scientific education and comprehension? Or maybe the survey questions were asked in different languages with differing semantic meaning?
I can buy a certain amount of religious bias towards the use of nano-technology, but I would bet that these “informed respondents” have been more influenced by scary Borg episodes on Star Trek than by moral conviction.
Actually I learned to fear NanoTechnology from Star Trek, Stargate SG1, and Stargate Atlantis. Those damn little robots always become self aware and see humans as threats.
I don’t know that many Christian that have a problem with Technology. How it is used is when this issue comes up. I keep seeing that Christians are against Stem Cell research. This is the biggest crock of BS there is. We just don’t want it coming from embryonic sources. When the are just as good or better sources available. Like placenta.
Also I find these results a little fish give EU resists to Genetically Engineered foods.
Angel Baseballs wouldn’t go very far with the “meek” who enjoy the command mystery a miracle would afford them. whiskey nanos on Sunday:
http://www.nanowerk.com/
the whole idea of ‘playing god’ nowadays is ridiculous. The average American Christian today has many things that would’ve only been possible with witchcrafts hundreds of years ago. Of course they don’t realize this, because I guess they think a cellphone and HDTV is ‘natural’.
If nano techology can be found useful in molesting children, all religions will accept it
What makes Europe the standard of moral behavior?
Nano-weapons, nano-toxins, nano-tracking, nano-terrorism………. no concerns there?
Just like nuclear tech, there is no stopping it. That doesn’t mean it is something you don’t have to worry about.
It won’t be my problem unless they come up with Nano-immortality.
If this were digg, you would be +60 for that comment.
#6-#8==Very unfair and not accurate, but I did laugh.
Thought I read about “nano-contraception,” so on the religious front, its not looking too good.
There are things, Dr. Frankenstein, Man was not meant to know!
J/P=?
These Humanists are willing to accept questionable technology if it puts Christians out of joint. However, if it blows up in your face they will find a way to blame Christians.
These technologies are truly dangerous. The fact that the first bad incident has not swept the globe yet doesn’t mean they are safe. Capitalists want to get this stuff to market as fast as the market will allow. When there is an “oops”, the corporation dies, and they slouch off into obscurity with their bundles of dough.
Yes the country needs a technological edge that we can capitalize on, to save the economy. But these things are too dangerous to rush into production.
Do you remember the gasoline additive California used that contaminated all their ground water? Have you heard of the cane toads in Australia? How about asbestos and Thalidomide? How about PCB’s? How about Freon?
Maybe we could learn something by DNA splicing Ebola to influenza! Christians would hate that!
Is religion morally acceptable? Let’s start with xtianity (since the attempt was made to force that one on me when I was younger.)
Xtians worship the image of a tortured, dying man. This image is, no doubt, at the forefront of their thoughts as they make their endless, murderous wars.
Xtianity’s sister religions, Islam and Judaism are equally depraved, and equally harmful. The fact that these three religions are currently quite intent on murdering one another is, to me, a very hopeful sign.
RIght, let’s all chant it together now: FEAR, FEAR, FEAR, FEAR…
A lot of people FEAR that mobile phones and other magic wireless technologies are going to make us all grow tails and defecate from our ear holes someday. Many FEAR that teaching evolution will lead to a godless, anti-Christian nation of grandtheft auto worshiping “evil doers”.
FEAR, FEAR, FEAR, FEAR! ALL HAIL FEAR!
Yea–and 400 years ago the spainards were fearful of all the new diseases they would contract by going to the new world.
Oh!–wait a minute. They didn’t know.
Nevermind.
Hey Timbo,
Can you give an example of technology blowing up in a humanist’s face and then the blame being pinned on religion? That is sadly a sadly absurd and pathetic argument. And, you should probably read up on humanism before you make broad sweeping generalizations about who falls into that category, in your mind, and who doesn’t. It sounds to me like you’re putting any non-religious person into that category and that equals whining evil monkeys.
Nanotechnology is neither good nor evil. Unthinking use of it may be like, say, antibiotics. My point was that the fear is probably attributable to other factors beyond religion – unfortunately you take this as an attack on religion. Paranoia is not a religious belief buddy.
What are we afraid of? Becoming Borg? Isn’t that what PDA’s and Cell Phones are for?
Helping infertile couples have kids? If anything, isn’t this playing God? Old news.
Cloning? Snore….
NanoTech isn’t going to be the end of the earth. It has even been proven to those of us who pay attention that the “grey goo” scenario isn’t possible. (Don’t believe me? Google some research)
Mankind has the ability to wipe itself out. Has had it for a long time.
Nanotech isn’t going to change that, but it may make life a little easier. Think of it more like a new car when all you had before was a horse and buggy.
Why is there even a question about the “morality” of “nano-tech”? What about the morality of washing powder to wash your clothes? Or using computers to write text and communicate? Or using paper to write on? All three examples use some form of “nano-tech” (emulsions, circuit board construction and paper additives such as polymers and minerals). Nano is just a prefix. In this context it’s used to define a length scale. What’s morally reprehensible in that? Besides, it’s a large field – is it all good/bad?
Is this about the “Grey Goo”? Face it, we’re already surrounded by it. Oh yes, I just realized, you’re all made of “Green Nano Goo” yourselves (proteins, DNA, etc). So why fight it? It has always been there, it’ll always be there.
This was a stupid survey and a complete waste of time for all involved. Define the question properly instead of just using “nano-tech” in ignorance.
In contrast, I find that most Europeans are totally paranoid about GMOs while most Americans don’t give it a second thought at all.
I like the pedophile hook here, throw in some nano-enzyte and you’ll hook the rest of the crowd.
#17 – This was a stupid survey and a complete waste of time for all involved.
As are all surveys that concern the thoughts, opinions, or feelings of the zealous theist. These people should simply be ignored. The grown ups have work to do.
#0 –
“…researchers are viewed as “playing God” when they create materials that do not occur in nature…”
Such nanoidiocy. If a human creates something, anything – then that thing thereby ‘occurs in nature.’
Or were its component atoms imported from an alternate universe?