08.30 Registration and coffee
09.00 Simone van der Burg – Welcome
09.10 Breaking the ice: speed dating
Four people at a table have the chance to get to know each other’s work in ten minutes. After that, they move to another table with three other partners. They have ten minutes again. And then to a third table: ten more minutes. During these speed dates special attention will be paid to everyone’s view on the purpose of the engagement of an ethicist in the laboratory.
09.50 Tsjalling Swierstra - Introduction to the Twente method of lab engagements
10.35 Coffee break
Ethicists aim to broaden the deliberation of techno-scientists about ethical issues relating to their work. This raises questions such as: What type of ethical language should be adopted to this end? What types of heuristics of ethical expressions can enable/frustrate processes of joint deliberation? What kind of normativity do such ethical expressions have? What is their authority in relation to other types of norms, such as scientific, economic, practical or juridical norms? And should ethicists in the research context say anything substantive at all about norms and values, or should it only be their role to facilitate debates?
10.45 Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent
11.15 Marianne Boenink - From impartiality to engagement: a Wittgensteinian approach to ethics of engineering and technology
13.30 Ramón Queraltó - Ethical values as a reverse Trojan Horse (RTH): A social methodology for scientific research?
14.00 Dirk Haen – Food innovation: the framing of hard and soft impacts
14.30 Rune Nydal - Ethics in three idioms for thinking about science, technology and society
The integration of an ethicist during the techno-scientific research phase opens up the possibility that ethicists anticipate the ambiguous impacts of technological innovations on the quality of human life during research, and offer those insights to the scientific engineers at a stage when the technology is still malleable. This makes it possible for ethicists to co-shape the technology, and to offer constructive advice that is experienced as being helpful by the engineers. But how should an ethicist imagine the future? What kind of imagination offers the basis for the constructive advice that is aimed for?
16.00 Alfred Nordmann – What is your problem? Finding the path of least resistance
16.30 Rosalyn Berne - Scientists, Ego and Ethics: Anticipating the Future via Access to the Self
17.00 Federica Lucivero - Technological visions in techno-scientific expectations: reflections from the lab-floor
19.15 Bus to restaurant Het Vrijdag
19.30 Dinner at restaurant Het Vrijdag
Techno-scientists usually seek contact with many people during their research: they talk to scientific peers, members of (public) research funding institutions, producers, lawyers, designers and some users. But the ethicist is new in this consortium. How should the ethicist understand and practice his or her role? And how can the presence of ethicists in the laboratory be justified?
08.30 Armin Grunwald - Normative uncertainties on the Lab Floor – roles of ethicists
09.00 Pru Hobson-West & Nick Wright - What is the role of the ethicist in encouraging deliberation?
A critical examination of the Ethical Matrix Method
09.30 Simone van der Burg - Is history important for ethicists on the laboratory floor?
10.45 Coffee break
11.00 Antonio Calleja López - Co-laboratory experiments and Socratic performances
11.30 Steven Flipse - Laboratory engagement in for-profit context
One way to enhance ethical reflection in the laboratory is to engage an ethicist in the scientific research consortium. But there are also other ways to get techno-scientists to think about ethics. For example by means of an inclusion of ethical requirements in the institutional context in which techno-scientists work, or by means of the organization of discussions among scientists and citizens about ethical issues relating to their work. In this part of the program we want to focus on these initiatives to do ethics ‘by other means’. This raises questions such as: whose business is it to talk about ethics? Is there a role for the ethical expert, or not? What are the possibilities and limitations of the engagement of an ethicist in the laboratory? And what are the possibilities and limitations of endeavors to introduce ethics without the ethicist?
13.30 Arie Rip - Why do ethics if you can do Constructive TA instead?
14.00 Ulrike Felt - Ethics, responsibility and the new public management of research: Reflecting on essential tensions in the governance of academic research
14.30 Lotte Krabbenborg - The ‘Dramatic stakeholder rehearsals’ on techno-moral issues concerning the development of nanotechnology
15.45 Coffee break
16.00 Hedwig te Molder – Emergent technologies against the background of everyday life: Discursive psychology as a TA and reflection tool
17.00 Simone van der Burg - Final wrap-up: Conclusions of this workshop & questions and themes for further study
19.00 Dinner at the Faculty Club