This thesis analyses a few selected aspects of crop biotechnology in agriculture. The thesis contains two essays; the first addresses the topic of how ethical tools can help to, especially in democratic societies, improve ethical judgments on modern biotechnologies used in agriculture and food production. The second essay explores GM crops and the question of whether engaging and promoting agriculture biotechnology would be an expression of hubris. Essay I discusses ethical tools and more specifically what makes a tool a good one. It is argued that some of the previous attempts of evaluating ethical tools are unfruitful. Myself and Per Sandin propose that ethical tools be divided into three categories with regard to their different aim(s). We suggest that the quality of an ethical tool is decided by its purposiveness, i.e. how well the tool achieves its assigned purpose(s). Essay II discusses the concept of hubris with regard to agricultural biotechnology. Several authors have claimed that supporting agricultural biotechnology is an expression of hubris. Ronald Sandler has given the argument its most structured account of yet. I argue that Sandler fails to establish a presumption against the use of GM crops and that the concept of hubris should play no role in evaluating GM crops and agricultural biotechnology. / <p>QC 20150330</p> / Mistra Biotech
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:kth-162187 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Moula, Payam |
| Publisher | KTH, Filosofi, Stockholm |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | Theses in philosophy from the Royal Institute of Technology, 1650-8831 |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds