In the context of synthetic biology, scientists and bioengineers talk of living beings as being ‘living machines'. This categorisation of the envisaged new life forms has given rise to the ethical concern that their moral status may be seen as different from that of natural or only partially artificial living beings (GMOs). The paper discusses the notion of a living being and the notion of a machine in order to arrive at a conclusion to the question of whether this categorisation is warranted or not. For this reason, it also looks back to the history of the comparison of living beings to machines and tries to show what motivated the analogy. In the end, though, it is argued that one should stop short of categorising living beings as machines, even if there are areas of analogy between living beings and machines. Finally, the idea that the envisaged artificial synthetic living beings could be regarded as some kind of machines is rejected.
Aristotle.De An.: Peri psychês, in Aristoteli opera, 5 vol., ed. by BekkerI. and GigonO., vol. 1. Berlin: De Gruyter1960–1987.
2.
Aristotle.Metaphysics: Tôn meta ta physika, in Aristoteli opera, 5 vol., ed. by BekkerI. and GigonO., vol. 2. Berlin: De Gruyter1960–1987.
3.
Aristotle.De Part. An.: Über die Teile der Tiere, in: Aristoteles, Werke, Greek and German, ed. by von FrantziusA., vol. 5 [Leipzig 1953]. Reprint Aalen: Scientia 1978.
4.
von BaerK.E. [1876] 1886. ‘Über Zielstrebigkeit in den organischen Körpern insbesondere’, in BaerK. E., Reden, 2nd part (Braunschweig: Vieweg), pp. 171–234.
5.
BoldtJ. and MüllerO.. 2008. ‘Newtons of the leaves of grass’. Nature Biotechnology26(4): 387–389.
6.
CanguilhemG.2008. Knowledge of Life [La Connaissance de la Vie, 1965], trans. GeroulanosS. and GinsburgD., ed. and foreword MarratiP. and MeyersT.. New York: Fordham University Press.
7.
DawkinsRichard. 1998. ‘Universal Darwinism’. In HullDavid and RuseMichael (eds.), The Philosophy of Biology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 14–37.
8.
DeplazesA. and HuppenbauerM.. 2009. ‘Synthetic organisms and living machines’. Systems and Synthetic Biology3: 55–63.
9.
Descartes [1642] 1982–91. Oeuvres de Descartes, ed. AdamC. and TanneryP., ‘nouvelle presentation’, Vol. III. Paris: Vrin.
10.
FredeM.1992. ‘On Aristotle's conception of soul’ in NussbaumM. and Oksenberg-RortyA. (eds.), Essays on Aristotle's De Anima (Oxford: Clarendon Press), pp. 93–107.
11.
FreyR.G.1980. Interests and Rights: The Case against Animals.Oxford: Clarendon Press.
12.
FurthM.1988. Substance, Form, and Psyche: an Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
GibsonD. G.2010. ‘Creation of a bacterial cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome’. Science329: 52–56.
15.
GlassJ.L., . 2006. ‘Essential genes of a minimal bacterium’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America103: 425–430.
16.
InwagenP. Van1990. Material Beings. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
17.
JonasH.1965. ‘Spinoza and the Theory of Organism’. Journal of the History of Philosophy3: 43–58.
18.
JonasH. [1979] 1984. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
19.
KantI. [1790] 1952. The Critique of Teleological Judgement. In The Critique of Judgement [Kritik der Urteilskraft 1790], transl. MeredithJ.C., revised and ed. WalterN.. Oxford: Oxford UP.
de La MettrieJ.O. [1747] 1991. Die Maschine Mensch [L'homme machine 1747], transl. and ed. BeckerC.. Hamburg: Meiner.
22.
LockeJ. [1690] 1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. NidditchP.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
LoweJ.1988. ‘The problems of intrinsic change: a rejoinder to Lewis’. Analysis48: 73–77.
24.
MachamerP., DardenL. and CraverC.F.. 2000. ‘Thinking about mechanisms’. Philosophy of Science67: 1–25.
25.
MüllerO. and MaioG.. 2009. Synthetische Biologie. Eine ethisch-philosophische Analyse, ed. by the Eidgenössische Ethikkommission für die Biotechnologie im Außerhumanbereich (EKAH) and Ariane Willemsen, Beiträge zur Ethik und Biotechnologie, vol. 5, Bern: Bundesamt für Bauten und Logistik (BBL).
26.
McLaughlinP.2001. What Functions Explain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
O'NeillJ.2003. ‘Three varieties of intrinsic value’. In LightA. and RolstonH.III (eds.), Evironmental Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell), pp. 138–140.
28.
PlessnerH. [1928] 1975. Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch. Berlin: De Gruyter.
29.
RasmussenS. (eds.) 2008. Protocells. Bridging Living and Nonliving Matter. Cambridge: MIT Press.
30.
ReganT.1976. ‘Feinberg on what sorts of beings can have rights’. Southern Journal of Philosophy14: 485–498.
31.
ReganT.1983. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.
32.
RoD.-K.. 2006. ‘Production of the antimalarial drug precursor in engineered yeast’. Nature440: 940–943.
33.
SutterA.1988. Göttliche Maschinen. Die Automaten für Lebendiges bei Descartes, LaMettrie und Kant. Frankfurt am Main: Athenäum.
34.
ScharkM.2005. Lebewesen versus Dinge. Eine metaphysische Studie. Berlin etc.: De Gruyter.
35.
SchmittA.1997. ‘Verhaltensforschung als Psychologie. Aristoteles zum Verhältnis von Mensch und Tier’, in KullmannW. and FöllingerS. (eds.), Aristotelische Biologie (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag), pp. 259–285.
36.
SimonsP.1987. Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37.
StrawsonP.F.1959. Individuals. London: Routledge.
38.
ToepferG.2005. ‘Der Begriff des Lebens’, in ToepferG. and KrohsU. (eds.), Philosophie der Biologie (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp), pp. 157–174.
39.
WigginsD.1976. ‘Locke, Butler and the stream of consciousness: and men as natural kind’, in Oksenberg-RortyA. (ed.), The Identities of Persons (Berkeley/L.A.: University of California Press), pp. 139–173.
40.
von WrightG.H.. 1963. The Varieties of Goodness. London: Routledge.
41.
ZimmermannD.W.1995. ‘Theories of masses and problems of constitution’. Philosophical Review104: 53–110.
