Gentechnik und die Eigenwürde der Natur

Mein Weg zur ethischen Urteilsbildung
Elemente der Naturwissenschaft 63, 1995, P. 1-13 | DOI: 10.18756/edn.63.1


This essay describes some personal experiences of the author in coming to an ethical judgement about the genetic modification of animals. Ethical judgement always has a social and a cognitive component. The ideal of ethical individualism and social processes of decision-making about ethical questions stand in a dynamic relationship to one another. Cognitively there is the question of the moral status of plants and animals (instrumental or intrinsic value) and what this means in relation to the genetic modification of living organisms. Modern techniques force us to reconsider the question of essentialism in biology. It is maintained that phenomenological methods of studying nature are necessary to deal with this question.

  • Amons, R. et al. (1994): Genmanipulation an Pflanze, Tier und Mensch. Grundlagen zur Urteilsbildung, Stuttgart.
  • Brom, F.W.A. u. E. Schroten (1993): Ethical questions around animal biotechnology. The Dutch approach. In: Livestock Production Science, 36, S. 99-107.
  • Dawkins, R. (1976): The selfish gene, Oxford.
  • Gleich, A. von (1989): Der wissenschaftliche Umgang mit der Natur. Über die Vielfalt harter und sanfter Naturwissenschaften, Frankfurt/New York.
  • Goodwin, B. (1994): How the leopard changed its spots. The evolution of complexity, New York/ London.
  • Groot, WT. de (1992): Environmental science theory, Amsterdam.
  • Kugler, R. (1967): Philosophische Aspekte der Biologie Adolf Portmanns, Zürich.
  • Mayr, E. (1988): Toward a new philosophy of biology, Cambridge, Mass.
  • Newman, S.A. (1988): Idealist biology. In: Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 31/3, 5. 353—368.
  • Regan, T. (1983): The case for animal rights, Berkeley.
  • Rollin, B.E. (1981): Animal rights and human morality, Buffalo N.Y.
  • Rollin, BE. (1986): The Frankenstein thing: the moral impact of genetic engineering of agricultural animals on society and future science. In: J. W. Evans u. A. Hollaender (Hg.), Genetic engineering of animals, New York, 285-297.
  • Singer, P. (1975): Animal liberation: a new ethics for our treatment of animals, New York.
  • Steiner, R. (1976): Anthroposophische Leitsätze, Dornach.
  • Teutsch, GM. (1987): Lexikon der Tierschutzethik, Göttingen.
  • Verhoog, H. (1980): Science and the social responsibility of natural scientists, Leiden.
  • Verhoog, H. (1990): Das menschliche Verhältnis zur Natur als modernes Kulturproblem. In: Sozialwissenschaftliche Literaturrundschau 13/21, 50—55.
  • Verhoog, H. (1991): The scientific perception of animals as object. ln: Between the species 7, 208212.
  • Verhoog‚ H. (1992a): The concept of intrinsic value and transgenic animals. In: journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5, 147—160.
  • Verboog, H. (1992b): Ethics and genetic engineering of animals. In: A.W. Musschenga et al. (Hg.), Morality, world view, and law, Assen, 267—278.
  • Verboog, H. (1993): Animals in education and the structure of science. In: Global Bioethics 6/3, 177—186.
  • Wemelsfelder, F. (1993): Animal boredom, towards an empirical approach of animal subjectivity, Leiden.
  • Wolpert, L. (1992): The unnatural nature of science, London.