↓ Skip to main content

Machine metaphors and ethics in synthetic biology

Overview of attention for article published in Life Sciences, Society and Policy, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#13 of 109)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Machine metaphors and ethics in synthetic biology
Published in
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40504-018-0077-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joachim Boldt

Abstract

The extent to which machine metaphors are used in synthetic biology is striking. These metaphors contain a specific perspective on organisms as well as on scientific and technological progress. Expressions such as "genetically engineered machine", "genetic circuit", and "platform organism", taken from the realms of electronic engineering, car manufacturing, and information technology, highlight specific aspects of the functioning of living beings while at the same time hiding others, such as evolutionary change and interdependencies in ecosystems. Since these latter aspects are relevant for, for example, risk evaluation of uncontained uses of synthetic organisms, it is ethically imperative to resist the thrust of machine metaphors in this respect. In addition, from the perspective of the machine metaphor viewing an entity as a moral agent or patient becomes dubious. If one were to regard living beings, including humans, as machines, it becomes difficult to justify ascriptions of moral status. Finally, the machine metaphor reinforces beliefs in the potential of synthetic biology to play a decisive role in solving societal problems, and downplays the role of alternative technological, and social and political measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 8 13%
Other 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Philosophy 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Arts and Humanities 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 17 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,123,373
of 24,468,058 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#13
of 109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,981
of 334,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,468,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.