Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nanoethics—A Way of Humanization of Technology for the Common Benefit

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Learning To Live Together: Promoting Social Harmony

  • 283 Accesses

Abstract

In this paper we summarize a brief history of nanoscience and nanotechnology by documenting the milestones on the roadmap of this branch. We discuss the new properties of materials and structures characteristic for the nanoworld. The role of social sciences and humanities in nanoscience is highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In 1905 A. Einstein explained the Brownian movement of small particles on the surface of liquid by their collisions with molecules of the liquid.

  2. 2.

    Almost 40 definitions of nanomaterials and nanoparticles were summarized by Boholm and Arvidsson (2016). About 40% of them refer to the nanoscale properties of nano-entities differing from bulk properties, 60% of definitions involve various quantitative boundaries of nanostructure dimensions between 0.1 and 500 nm. Two definitions refer to the surface area of nanostructures >60 m2/cm3. According to our opinion the best choice of the upper boundary is 200 nm corresponding to the interface between electron and optical microscope resolution.

  3. 3.

    The Kavli prize was established by Norwegian entrepreneur and philanthropist Fred Kavli. It is awarded every two years since 2008 in astrophysics, nanoscience and neuroscience.

References

  • Allhoff, F., Lin, P., Moore, D. (2010). What is nanotechnology and why does it matter? From science to ethics (pp. 304). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-7545-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnaldi, S., & Muratorio, A. (2013). Nanotechnology, uncertainty and regulation. Nanoethics, 7, 173–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacchini, F. (2013). Is nanotechnology giving rise to new ethical problems? Nanoethics, 7, 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastani, B., & Fernandez, D. (2002). Intellectual property rights in nanotechnology. Thin Solid Films, 420–421, 472–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bensaude-Vincent, B. (2009). Self-assembley, self-organization: Nanotechnology and vitalism. Nanoethics, 3, 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binnig, G., Rohrer, H., Gerber, Ch., & Weibel, E. (1982). Surface studies by scanning tunneling microscope. Physical Review Letters, 49, 57–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boholm, M., & Arvidsson, R. (2016). A definition framework for the terms nanomaterial and nanoparticle. Nanoethics, 10, 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commission Recommendation on a Code of Conduct for Responsible Nanosciences and Nanotechnology Research, European Commission, Brussels (2008) Document C. 424. http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu.

  • Dalton-Brown, S. (2012). Global ethics and nanotechnology: A comparison of the nanoethics environments in the EU and China. Nanoethics, 6, 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • del Castillo, A. M. P. (2013). The European and member states’ approaches to the regulating nanomaterials: Two level governance. Nanoethics, 7, 189–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorbeck-Jung, B., & Shelley-Egan, C. (2013). Meta-regulation and nanotechnologies: The challenge of responsibilisation within EC’s Code of Conduct for responsible N&N research. Nanoethics, 7, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosch, H., & van de Voorde, M. H. (Eds.). (2008). Genesys white paper. Stuttgart: Max-Planck Inst. für Metallforschung. ISBN 978-3-00-027338-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duarte, B. N., & Park, E. (2014). Body, technology and society: A dance of encounters. Nanoethics, 8, 259–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebbesen, M. (2008). The role of the humanities and social sciences in nanotechnology research and development. Nanoethics, 2, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eggelson, K. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120428000220.htm.

  • Etheridge, M. L., Campbell, S. A., Erdman, A. G., et al. (2013). The big picture on nanomedicine: The state of investigational and approved nanomedicine products, Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology. Biology and Medicine, 9, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feynman, R. P. (1960). There’s plenty of room at the bottom. Caltech Engineering and Science J. http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/feynman.html.

  • Feynman, M. (Ed.). (2015). The quotable Feynman (p. 181). Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-15303-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, T., & Sandler, R. (2008). Enhancing justice? Nanoethics, 2, 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24, 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, S. F., & Baun, A. (2015). DPSIR and stakeholder analysis of the use of nanosilver. Nanoethics, 9, 297–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hersam, M. (2011). Nanoscience and nanotechnology in the posthype era. ACS Nano, 5, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hongladarom, S. (2009). Nanotechnology, development and buddhist values. Nanoethics, 3, 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, D. L. (2005). Synthesis, properties, and applications of iron nanoparticles. Small, 1, 482–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hvistendahl, M. (2013). China’s publication bazaar. Science, 342, 1035–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Invernizzi, N. (2008). Vision of Brazilian scientists on nanoscience and nanotechnologies. Nanoethics, 2, 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. F., van de Poel, I., & Osseweijer, P. (2010). Sunscreens with titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles: A societal experiment. Nanoethics, 4, 103–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaye, P., Laflamme, R., & Mosca, M. (2007). An introduction to quantum computing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearnes, M., & Wynne, B. (2007). On nanotechnology and ambivalence: The politics of enthusiasm. Nanoethics, 1, 131–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjoelberg, K., & Wickson, F. (2007). Social and ethical interactions with nano: Mapping the early literature. Nanoethics, 1, 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koepsell, D. (2009). Let’s get smaller: An introduction to transitional issues in nanotech and intellectual property. Nanoethics, 3, 157–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y. (2017). The quarter-century anniversary of carbon nanotube research. ACS Nano, 11, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingner, S., & Weckert, J. (2016). Nanoscale-technologies as subject of responsible research and innovation. Nanoethics, 10, 173–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luby, S. (2017). Nanoworld at the palm of your hand, VEDA. Bratislava: Publ. House of SAS. in press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luby, Š., Lubyová, M., Šiffalovič, P., Jergel, M., Majková, E. (2015). A brief history of nanoscience and foresight in nanotechnology, Chap. 4. In M. Bardosova, T. Wagner (Eds.), Nanomaterials and Nanoarchitectures. Proceedings of NATO ASI on Nanomaterials and Nanoarchitectures, Cork, July 2013 (pp. 63–85). Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 978-94-017-9937-9.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Maclurcan, D. (2012). Nanotechnology and global equality (pp. 451), Singapore: Pan Stanford Publ. ISBN 978-981-4303-39-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, R. (2010). Ethical responsibilities of nanotechnology researchers: A short guide. Nanoethics, 4, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuit. In Proceedings of Electronics, April 19 (p. 114).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriarty, P. (2001). Nanostructured materials. Reports on Progress in Physics, 64, 297–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nanotechnology: The invisible giant tackling Europe’s future challenges (2013). DG Res. Inov. Ind. Techn. EUR 13325 EN. ISBN 978-92-79-28892-0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra Rao, C. N., Kulkarni, G. U., Thomas, P. J., et al. (2000). Metal nanoparticles and their assemblies. Chemical Society Reviews, 29, 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roubert, F., Beuzelin-Ollivier, M.-G., Hofmann-Amtenbrink, M., Hofman, H., & Hool, A. (2016). Nanostandardization in action: Implementing standardization process in a multidisciplinary nanoparticle-based research and development project. Nanoethics, 10, 41–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sajgalik, P., Hnatko, M., Lences, Z., et al. (2006). In situ preparation of Si3N4/SiC nanocomposites for cutting tools. International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology, 3, 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sand, M. (2016). Resonsibility of visioneering—opening Pandora’s box. Nanoethics, 10, 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, R. L. (Ed.). (2014). Ethics and emerging technologies (pp. 583). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-36702-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schattenburg, M. L. (2001). From nanometers to gigaparsecs: The role of nanostructures in unraveling the mysteries of the cosmos. Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology B, 19, 2319–2328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, D., Dalton-Brown, S., Schrempf, B., & Kaplan, D. (2016). Responsible, inclusive innovation and the nano-divide. Nanoethics, 10, 177–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelley-Egan, C. (2010). The ambivalence of promising technology. Nanoethics, 4, 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette, K. (2007). Nanotoxicology and ethical conditions for informed consent. Nanoethics, 1, 47–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stix, G. (2001). Little big science. Scientific American, 26 September 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, J. (2009). Is the patent system fit to meet the needs of the “triple helix” alliance?. In M. Eder (Eds.), 20 Jahre Europäische Akademie der Wissenschaften und Künste (Weimar ed., pp. 371–385) Salzburg. ISBN 978-3-89739-666-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swierstra, A. T., Boenink, M., Walhout, B., & van Est, R. (2009). Converging technologies, shifting boundaries. Nanoethics, 3, 213–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. R., et al. (2011). Nanomaterials in the environment: From materials to high-throughput screening to organisms. ACS Nano, 5, 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. B. (2008). The opposite of human enhancement: Nanotechnology and the blind chicken problem. Nanoethics, 2, 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toumey, C. (2007). Privacy in the shadow of nanotechnology. Nanoethics, 1, 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toumey, C. (2011). Seven religious reactions to nanotechnology. Nanoethics, 5, 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Transistors won’t shrink beyond 2021 (2015). International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trisolino, A. (2014). Nanomedicine: Building a bridge between science nad law. Nanoethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-014-0193-y.

  • Trujillo, L. Y. C. (2015). In: R. L. Sandler (Ed.), Ethics and emerging technologies (Vol. 9, pp. 251–254). Nanoethics, 2014. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Lente, H., Coenen, C., Fleischer, T., et al. (Eds.). (2012). Little by little: Expansion of nanoscience and emerging technologies (pp. 225). GmbH, Heidelberg: Akad. Verlagsges. ISBN 978-89838-674-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, B. B., & Loeve, S. (2014). Metaphors in nanomedicine: The case of targeted drug delivery. Nanoethics, 8, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldrop, M. (2016). More than Moore. Nature, 530(11.2.), 144–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warheit, D. B. (2004). Nanoparticles: Health impact? Materials Today, 7(2), 32–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by grants: VEGA 2/0010/15, SRDA-14-0891 and CNR-SAS 2016-2018 program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia

    Štefan Luby

  2. Centre for Psychological and Social Sciences, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia

    Martina Lubyová

Authors
  1. Štefan Luby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martina Lubyová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Štefan Luby .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Human Brain and Behavior Laboratory, Center for Complex Systems and Brain Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida, USA

    J. A. Scott Kelso

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Luby, Š., Lubyová, M. (2019). Nanoethics—A Way of Humanization of Technology for the Common Benefit. In: Kelso, J. (eds) Learning To Live Together: Promoting Social Harmony. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90659-1_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90659-1_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90658-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90659-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation