In a recent debate, Eric Drexler and Richard Smalley have discussed the chemical and physical possibility of constructing molecular assemblers - devices that guide chemical reactions by placing, with atomic precision, reactive molecules. Drexler insisted on the mechanical feasibility of such assemblers, whereas Smalley resisted the idea that such devices could be chemically constructed, because we do not have the required control. Underlying the debate, there are differences regarding the appropriate goals, methods, and theories (...) of nanotechnology, and the appropriate way of conceptualizing molecular assemblers. Not surprisingly, incommensurability emerges. In this paper, I assess the main features of the debate, the levels of the emerging incommensurability, and indicate one way in which the debate could be decided. (shrink)

This paper approaches the ‘Drexler-Smalley’ debate on nanotechnology from a neglected angle – the common denominator of ‘the frontier’ as a metaphor for scientific exploration. For Bensaude-Vincent, the debate exemplifies the clash of ‘two cultures’ – the ‘artificialist’ and biomimetic’ schools. For us, the portrayal of nanosphere as ‘new frontier’ stymies the prospect of genuine inter-cultural debate on the direction of molecular engineering. Drawing on Brandon, the‘dominium’ impulse of European imperialism is contrasted to the ‘communitas’ (...) tradition of Native America. Proposing a single label – hybridist – for both schools, we juxtapose to this approach the holistic disposition of indigenous North American science. (shrink)

From the perspective of philosophy of science and technologies, we firstly attend to the issue of the role of nanotechnologies within the evolution of technologies. We recognize their utmost importance in the respect that they are technologies of life itself. We further explain that the nano-level is the domain of intersection of the rules of quantum physics and traditional Newtonian physics. This is our starting point from which we discuss the issue of conditions under which minimizing things also changes their (...) functional essence. We use the example of the Drexler vs. Smalley debate to demonstrate the paradigmatic incomparability of the two perspectives and the physical-chemical and engineering-related limits of nanotechnologies. We discuss to what extent are the dangers and ethical implications emerging from Drexler’s contemplations real, be it what he calls the “grey goo” problem or the issues of molecular production. We regard certain problems linked to synthetic biology as more serious. We conclude our text with the consideration that the human civilization should think of the possibilities of nanotechnologies in the development of life as an existential challenge. (shrink)

A number of recent reports and overviews on the ethical and societal problems of nanotechnology present a public that is polarized about nanotechnology. Very little responsible analysis can be found between those poles for two reasons. First, the debate about the highly controversial notion of molecular manufacturing introduced by Eric Drexler shaped much of the early discussion. Second, the polarization can be seen as a consequence of uncertainty about nanotechnology compounded by cognitive barriers. A reporter to UNESCO acknowledges (...) that “…Assessments of nanotechnology tend to radically diverge…These radically diverging assessments that have thus far dominated the debate on nanotechnology seem to be due to a lack of common ground.” The “lack of common ground” is not unprecedented in the history of technology, and scientists rightfully fear a new “GMO debacle.”. (shrink)

In this paper I question the claims made for a ‘coming era of nanotechnology’ and the ethical challenges, it is argued, that are entailed by this particular technological revolution. I argue that such futurist claims are sustained by an untenable modernist narrative which separates the technical and the social. This is exemplified by the work of K. Eric Drexler and his claim that whilst the course of scientific knowledge may remain unpredictable we nevertheless can predict with accuracy the trajectory (...) of technology and particularly the emergence of nanotechnology. The problem then, on the basis of knowledge about the future state of technology, is to make choices now which will forestall unintended and undesirable consequences. Firstly, the paper argues for a radical scepticism towards all forms of forecasting or prediction but especially technological forecasting of the type exemplified in the debate around nanotechnology. Secondly, given this radical scepticism the paper criticises the idea that a prospective ethics can be created on the basis of an assessment of consequences of nanotechnology. (shrink)

Focusing on the breakthrough field of molecular engineering--a new technology enabling scientists to build tiny machines atom by atom--the author offers projections on how this technological revolution will affect the future of computer science, space travel, medicine, and manufacturing.

The revolutionary Feynman vision of a powerful and general nanotechnology, based on nanomachines that build with atom-by-atom control, promises great opportunities and, if abused, great dangers. This vision made nanotechnology a buzzword and launched the global nanotechnology race. Along the way, however, the meaning of the word has shifted. A vastly broadened definition of nanotechnology (including any technology with nanoscale features) enabled specialists from diverse fields to infuse unrelated research with the Feynman mystique. The resulting nanoscaletechnology funding coalition has obscured (...) the Feynman vision by misunderstanding its basis, distrusting its promise, and fearing that public concern regarding its dangers might interfere with research funding. In response, leaders of a funding coalition have attempted to narrow nanotechnology to exclude one area of nanoscale technology—the Feynman vision itself. Their misdirected arguments against the Feynman vision have needlessly confused public discussion of the objectives and consequences of nanotechnology research. (shrink)

In this essay, Drexler reflects broadly on our practices as philosophy teachers: how we think of our classrooms and design students’ learning experiences, how we evaluate ourselves and our teaching, and generally, how we keep walking into the classroom each semester. Based on a talk she delivered in 2020, Drexler’s contribution to this issue presents a series of “chapters” of an “enchiridion” for teaching: a handbook of loosely-connected reflections, principles, and strategies for teaching Philosophy as a Way of (...) Life, and for teaching (philosophy) as a way of life. (shrink)

Aqua an ignis utilior - De sollertia animalium - Bruta ratione uti - De esu carnium I - De esu carnium II - Platonicae quaestiones - De animae procreatione in Timaeo - Epitome libri de animae procreatione in Timaeo.

This article explores the value of teaching Environmental Ethics as an introductory-level general education course for non-majors. It focuses on how philosophy can help students discern multiple voices within discourses, texts and thinking, and by doing so disrupt several untenable mental paradigms that new and underprepared students often bring with them to college: fixed and dualistic notions of truth, relativistic conceptions of difference, and decontextualized approaches to issues and ideas. This article also presents examples of class activities that are designed (...) to foster multivocal thinking and that are also manageable for faculty with high teaching loads. (shrink)

This essay explores the value of oppositional, performative political action in the context of oppression, domination, and exclusionary political spheres. Rather than adopting Iris Marion Young's approach, Drexler turns to Hannah Arendt's theories of political action in order to emphasize the capacity of political action as action to intervene in and disrupt the constricting, politically devitalizing, necrophilic normalizations of proceduralism and routine, and thus to reorient the importance of contestatory action as enabling and enacting creativity, spontaneity, and resistance.

The parametrized post-Newtonian (PPN) approximation is generalized to accommodate Rastall's modification of Einstein's theory of gravity, which allows nonzero divergence of the energy-momentum tensor. Rastall's theory is then shown to have consistent field equations, gauge conditions, and the correct Newtonian limit of the equations of motion. The PPN parameters are obtained and shown to agree experimentally with those for the Einstein theory. In light of the nonzero divergence condition, integral conservation laws are investigated and shown to yield conserved energy-momentum and (...) angularmomentum. We conclude that the above generalization of metric theories, within the PPN framework, is a natural extension of the concept of metric theories. (shrink)

The essays in this volume interrogate the problem of modern/colonial definitions of the human person and take up the struggle to decolonize such descriptions. Contributions engage work from various fields, including ethnic studies, religious studies, theology, queer theory, philosophy, and literary studies.