8.2. Lessons from the Tokyo Session
pp. 147-148 in
Bioethics and the Impact of Human Genome Research in the 21st Century
Author: Christian Byk (IALES, France)Editors: Norio Fujiki, Masakatu Sudo, and Darryl R. J. Macer
Eubios Ethics Institute
Copyright 2001, Eubios Ethics Institute
All commercial rights reserved. This publication may be reproduced for limited educational or academic use, however please enquire with the author.
"Bio-ethics "Bio-ethics , Health and Envirment ment : the Public in Policy" was the common dimension of a series of meetings whichook place in ook place in Fukuoka, Tsukuba, Tokyo and Fukui with representatives of the various disciplines and regions concerned with bio-ethics. An initial message already emerges : biomedical applications affect not only man but also his environment. It also brgs together disciplines and cultures which were once quite distinct.
Having said this, we should immediately recognise the major difficulties inherent in this enterprise. First, for methodological reasons, it is necessary to call on numerous experts, academics and scientists in the sub-disciplines concerned with the whole range of technical applications in this field. This specialisation does not contribute to an overall view of these scientific developments and their long term perspectives. However, a comprehensive study of these new biomedical applications is a necessary preliminary step to substantiating any overall analysis.
Secondly, a major difficulty lies in the fact that modern society sometimes refuses to recognise that the proper development of medical and biological sciences is deeply rooted in a philosophy of science, in a "Neue Weltanschauung wo Mensch und die Erde zusammen studiert werden".
It is too easy to reach false conclusions when we should be identifying an approach that would allow us to answer the following question: how can society control human activities that confer new power?
From what we know today of our capacity to remodel ourselves and our world, we might be justified in believing that everything is possible; great optimism goes hand in hand with great pessimism.
It is probably too early and may even be futile to express definite views on the future of our civilisation. Past experience shows that it may possibly come to an end. Instead, we should now look more closely at how our actions may influence this future. Since the eighteenth century and the Enlightenment, we have maintained the myth of rationality, which implies that each new scientific application constitutes progress for all of humanity. This myth exists in science as well as in other disciplines, for example the law. This is the revenge of Prometheus. But in the twentieth century, Prometheus met Frankenstein. In this context it is important to bear the following in mind:
1) We are facing a series of global issues with a number of related causes and related effects.
The effects concern the impact of a series of events on our health and environment ― the disappearance of the ozone layer, the destruction of forests as a result of acid rain, declining biodiversity. The causes all have one factor in common : man's use of new techniques and the imposition of a unique development model. We have transformed and recreated our world in a way that makes it difficult to apply the term "nature" to it. As a result of our deliberate actions, new phenomena have emerged with a global dimension for example in the fields of energy, space, time, speed or satellite. New risks have appeared ― as Philippe Lazar has suggested, we could call them "universal risks" ― that offer further evidence that the planet is in danger. It is not only individuals and countries that suffer from war and economic competition; the two sides in such conflicts also pose a threat to the planet as a whole, that will suffer from their actions.
2) The operational concepts and legal and scientific specialisms we once used to control our activities do not measure up to these global issues. The interaction between man and his environment does not currently lend itself to mutual harmony. Our present legal system seems unable to provide or enforce a balanced system of protection for the following reasons. Its terminology and the concepts are entirely devoted to protecting the human being. Its methodology, which I have called the active concept of legal conservatism, is time-consuming, and is affected by the information and communications revolution. Rational criteria can still be used in developing risk management strategies. However, those criteria are unable to provide us with appropriate answers relating to the nature of man. This presupposes the regulation of the legal system and a new approach to anthropology. Parenthood and wider family and social relationships are taking on new forms, and even the very definition of a human being ― should the embryo be included, what about the human donor ― has to be reconsidered.
3) The recasting of our reference system necessitates a search for a new identity. This search concerns not only the fundamental question of what is a human being, but also that of what is valuable in the environment. At present, this quest for identity is expressed mainly in a revival of national cultures, in religious practice or in the search for genetic origins. Is this really the way forward?
Our nostalgia for the past should not prevent us from taking into account what man will be tomorrow : a symbiotic man. For him, space will have no limit, instant communication will bring him knowledge and expertise and he will be faced increasingly with the need to take immediate decisions. He will also benefit from powerful energy sources. However, the symbiotic man will probably coexist with other types of men belonging to earlier cultures. International scientific co-operation will then be a useful approach, respecting differences and building bridges. If he forgets his interdependence with others, not only will he probably create a new master-slave relationship, but he is likely to precipitate the end of our civilisation.
Please send comments to
Email <
asianbioethics@yahoo.co.nz >.
To contents page
To Eubios book list
To Eubios Ethics Institute home page