Risk and Fear: Restricting Science under Uncertainty.

The catastrophic risks posed by new technologies such as killer robots and geoengineering have triggered calls for halting new research. Arguments for restricting research typically have a slippery‐slope structure: Researching A will lead to deployment; we have decisive moral reasons against deploym...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Applied Philosophy Vol. 38; no. 3; pp. 444 - 461
Main Author: Pamuk, Zeynep
Format: Article
Published: Wiley-Blackwell Jul2021
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=151470871&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 151470871
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        02643758
        BQ0
      jtl: Journal of Applied Philosophy
      issn: 02643758
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2021
      vid: 38
      iid: 3
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        151470871
        10.1111/japp.12484
      ppf: 444
      ppct: 17
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 139KB
      tig:
        atl: Risk and Fear: Restricting Science under Uncertainty.
      aug:
        au: Pamuk, Zeynep
        affil: Department of Political Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla CA, 92093, , USA
      su:
        Uncertainty
        Human experimentation
        Moral reasoning
        Anxiety
        Fear
      sug:
        subj:
          Uncertainty
          Human experimentation
          Moral reasoning
          Anxiety
          Fear
      ab: The catastrophic risks posed by new technologies such as killer robots and geoengineering have triggered calls for halting new research. Arguments for restricting research typically have a slippery‐slope structure: Researching A will lead to deployment; we have decisive moral reasons against deployment; therefore, we should not research A. However, scientific uncertainty makes it difficult to prove or disprove the conclusion of slippery‐slope arguments. This article accepts this indeterminacy and asks whether and when it would be permissible to restrict research under empirical and normative uncertainty. The argument starts from the ethical framework for the regulation of scientific research with human subjects and offers modifications to adapt it to the purpose of restricting new technologies. Two main questions arise in the process: whether it is permissible to impose restrictions at the research stage to prevent harms that will arise from the use of a technology and whether it is permissible to restrict research preemptively on the grounds of public fear and anxiety, before there is sufficient evidence establishing the risk of harm. I answer both questions in the affirmative and defend this position against objections.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Journal of Applied Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Journal of Applied Philosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N