Search
Warning: Undefined array key "6725//" in /web/zanos/classes/Edit/EditForm_class.php on line 263
Warning: Undefined array key "6725//" in /web/zanos/classes/Player/SearchArticle_class.php on line 261
# | Search | Downloads | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | The starting point of the theoretical analysis of the article is the concept of a sociotechnical regime, which reveals the relationship between inertial and innovative trends, as well as the mutual influence of intrascientific and sociocultural factors on the development of technoscience. The author focuses on the transformative potential of genetic technologies, which are often described as promising, disruptive, platform, breakthrough, etc. In the center of the author’s research interest are the CRISPR-Cas9 human genome editing technology and preimplantation genetic diagnostics. They have been shaped by the regulations, laboratory practices, academic institutions, markets, infrastructure, etc. of the current sociotechnical regime. In turn, they began to influence the regime gradually. Innovations in genetics affect social ideas about health and disease, about human nature, about the ratio of the hereditary and the social, about ways to prevent and treat many diseases, promising to solve many problems in health care and, in a radical version, to “enhance” human nature. The assessment of innovations by society is largely determined by the socially constructed meanings of genetics – metaphors, myths, images, narratives, which allow comprehending the unknown through familiar discourses and symbols, and embedding it in ideas about the prospects for biotechnology development. The social significance of many technologies and the attention of society to this issue emphasize the need to take into account the social and humanitarian dimensions of modern innovations, avoiding narrowly technological and one-sided approaches. At the same time, communication between science and society should be open and constructive in how the technology is developed and what risks may arise as a result of its use. This communication should take into account the experience of previous polemics and social representations of biotechnoscience, as shown in the article using the example of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technologies and PGD. Bioethics can play a significant role in communication processes, for it is focused on transdisciplinary ways of coordinating different positions that ensure the efficiency and validity of social acceptance of innovations – the admissibility of some technologies and social concerns about others. Keywords: metaphor, narrative, discourse, biotechnoscience, sociotechnical regime, genome editing, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, bioethics | 700 |