18.2 Public Perception of the ascent Field of Synthetic Biology 381showed again the way of science communication of the media on an emerging
technology, which might not be able to disseminate the technology properly to
the public due to lack of information on the key scientific issues while preferring
common metaphors.
A rather unusual way of trying to understand how lay people would react to SB
was done in relation to one of the first SB art exhibitions. The exhibition “synth-
ethic” showed 10 artworks from 10 international bio-artists in Vienna in May
and June 2011 [36]. The artwork dealt with various aspects of SB, the use of
biobricks not attempted by engineers, creation of protocells, modifying ecologi-
cal networks, potential environmental release, the meaning of synthesis as
opposed to analysis, etc (see http://www.biofaction.com/synth-ethic/)..) During
the exhibition gallery visitors were interviewed about their perception of the
artwork and the relation between art, science, and society. The results showed
that people had little ethical problems with the artwork as long as it entailed the
use and modification of lower life forms (bacteria, plants), but they were more
concerned as the bio-objects moved up the evolutionary ladder toward birds,
mammals, and even humans. An innate key concept seems to be the need to be
able to keep different categories separated from each other, and any crossing of
boundaries triggered uneasiness. Boundaries could be crossed in an ethical sense
by modi fying and designing mammals and humans or by crossing two different
living entities (hybrids) or by crossing organisms and machines [37]. Any attempt
to cross well-established boundaries of lay people’s naïve view on biology could
result in public resistance.
18.2.2.3 Germany
Three German research organizations – the German Research Foundation
(DFG), the German Academy of Science and Engineering (acatech), and the
German National Academy of Sciences (Leopoldina) – published a position arti-
cle to outline their strategies to SB while suggesting a broadly based scientific
and public debate on SB [38]. It suggested that SB would make major contribu-
tions to the society while bearing risks, such as legal aspects, biosafety and bios-
ecurity, commercial use, and ethics. While German scientists are active in the
research field [39], the German public, similar to its smaller neighbor Austria,
holds skeptic views on GMOs. It was feared that crossing “the boundaries
between living matter and technically constructed matter” would cause public
concern and that ethical boundaries were broken down as well. In their role as
funding agencies in Germany, they proposed that the activities supported by
public funding should “guarantee transparency by means of communication
that will foster public acceptance of this research field.” The ethical issues would
need to be debated by the public further based on the seven hypotheses and
goals [38]:
- The definition of life.
- The factors that determine the preconceived understanding of life.
- The description of entities.
- Moral arguments on applications of SB taking into consideration basic rights.
- Fundamental ethical objects against the applications of SB.