Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Rollin addresses this question of transcendence and materialism by
introducing the notion of telos as a starting point for parsing out accept-
able and unacceptable genetic manipulation. In his chapter “
Telos
, Value,
and Genetic Engineering,” Rollin starts with Aristotelian insights regard-
ing telos, and argues for a distinction between “is” and “ought” that
would reveal ethically acceptable and unacceptable forms of genetic engi-
neering. His chapter falls into two sections. The first deals with estab-
lishing a contemporary understanding of telos, rooted in Aristotle's
metaphysical concern with individuals, while the second uses this under-
standing to tease apart two sets of concerns with human nature: the bio-
logical and the social.
A short introductory section endorses the Aristotelian love of the
world we live in and suggests that Aristotle's understanding of biology
as the master science avoids many of the difficulties to which the
Cartesian mechanistic view of the world, with physics as the master
science, falls prey. He echoes Shannon and several others in his more tra-
ditional sense that we have an access to nature that can guide us (some-
what) in these discussions. But as his analysis of animal telos makes clear,
nature can be surprisingly flexible.
In the first section of his chapter, Rollin notes that telos refers to a
thing's nature, particularly its needs and interests that constitute its
nature. Articulating these needs and interests allows us to see how each
living thing responds to the challenges of living. Aristotle developed telos
into the ground for an ethic for human beings, but did not extend this
to the animal world. Yet Aristotle did see continuity between the animal
and the human worlds, particularly with regard to the similarities in
the use of slaves and domesticated animals. Rollin ties this similarity to
the issue of husbandry, the practical obligations humans have to their
animals because “domestic animals existed in a state of symbiotic unity
with their human owners.” For animals to survive, thrive, and fulfill their
domestic function, owners had serious responsibilities to care for their
animals, as in the biblical notion of the shepherd. The nature of animals
required a connection between their well-being and their successful
domesticated use. When the notion of husbandry was replaced by indus-
try, the connection between animals' well-being and their successful use
was severed. Industry is able to use a variety of technologies to ensure
that animals are successfully manipulated to meet human needs, but
