Innocent Fun or 'Microslavery'?
In 2011, Ingmar Riedel-Kruse's bioengineering laboratory at Stanford University publicized an application that uses paramecia for what the researchers termed 'biotic games.' These games make use of living organisms, computer programs, and lab equipment to implement games like Pong, Pac-man, and socc...
| Publicado en: | Hastings Center Report Vol. 44; no. 6; pp. 38 - 47 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Nov2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=99568388&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 99568388 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00930334 HCR jtl: Hastings Center Report issn: 00930334 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Nov2014 vid: 44 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 99568388 10.1002/hast.386 ppf: 38 ppct: 9 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 348KB tig: atl: Innocent Fun or 'Microslavery'? aug: au: Harvey, Hayden Havard, Molly Magnus, David Cho, Mildred K. Riedel‐Kruse, Ingmar H. su: Games Ethics Biological models Biomedical engineering Biotechnology Laboratory animals sug: subj: Games Ethics Research and Development in Biotechnology Hobby, Toy, and Game Stores Doll, Toy, and Game Manufacturing Toy and Hobby Goods and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers All Other Animal Production All other miscellaneous animal production Biological models Biomedical engineering Biotechnology Laboratory animals ab: In 2011, Ingmar Riedel-Kruse's bioengineering laboratory at Stanford University publicized an application that uses paramecia for what the researchers termed 'biotic games.' These games make use of living organisms, computer programs, and lab equipment to implement games like Pong, Pac-man, and soccer. Gamesand related activities are often considered nonserious or trivial, whereas life, biological systems, and science are treated very seriously in moral analysis and public perception. The manipulation of living matter frequently engenders at least some controversy in the marketplace of ideas, and using living things in games is no exception. Some of the objections lodged against biotic games have appeared in the ethics literature on similar topics; however, the addition of an entertainment element introduces some objections distinct from those about similar cases, as the online comments vividly illustrate. We aim to explore and address the objections in this paper, using the comments to organize and launch the discussion. In scientific work, there is typically a presumption of some prospect of translation and application of generated knowledge for public benefit. In the case of biotic games, these applications are not self-evident. Because of this, a serious analysis of the justifications, limitations, and features of biotic games is warranted. To this end, we outline key ethical limits that ought to be placed on these activities as well as the obligations that these activities generate for researchers, other professionals, and lay people who design, implement, use, and play them. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|