Ethical Aspects of ICT Implants - Petition critical of 7th European research programm
Petition critical of 7th European research programm (for those interested it has to be signed quite soon) by the European Science Social Forum network and Fondation Sciences Citoyennes.
Some Non profit organisations and Organisations of scientists are currently getting organised to discuss the objectives of the 7th research programms in Europe (ie militarisation, security solution, serving the industry more than civil society). And nanotechnologies and ICT implants are now surfacing in ethicists reports that claim they could be used for surveillance and manipulation (see the press release: http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?info=EXLINK&reference=MEMO/05/97&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=de
Ethical aspects of ICT implants in the human body: opinion presented to the Commission by the European Group on Ethics )
Below a link to the website of the European Science Social Forum Network, where a critical petition regarding this programm can be signed: http://www.essfnetwork.org/index.html
EXCERPT of the presentation:
The Framework Programs (FP) of the European Union (EU) are documents that set the guidelines ruling the budgetary distribution between the different research areas over periods of 4 to 6 years. They set the prioritary thematics and key technologies that will be preferentially financed by the EU. At present, the EU is defining the FP7 which will be effective from 2007 to 2013. The FP7 is not yet ready, but apparently it will follow the spirit of the FP6, being largely influenced by industrial competitiveness and buissness grouping interests. Besides, the new conception of 'European security' reflects militar interests also influencing the FP7.
The ESSF thinks that Europe deserves better, and that another research agenda is possible. Thus, we propose a set of guidelines standing for another model of scientific and technological progres, oriented to fulfill societal well-beeing, enviromental sustainability and global justice.
EXCERPT of the petition : http://www.essfnetwork.org/fp7doc.html
Nanotechnology was prominent in FP6 and is likely to be even more prominent in FP7 in convergence with bio- and info- technologies and cognitive neurosciences. Although it may offer exciting new vistas in e.g. medicine, it is likely to be of little use in creating an appropriate technology that will help the majority of the world's inhabitants. The sinister applications of nanotechnology to uses such as controlling individuals and armaments have to be regulated by international agreements - again an example where public control of research is important.
Besides, the report by the UK organisation "Scientists for Global Responsibility" against militarisation of research is quoted: Chris Langley, 2005. Soldiers in the Laboratory, Scientists for Global Responsibility, London. Jan 2005. http://www.sgr.org.uk/DownloadFormArms.htm
Regards,
NL
Some Non profit organisations and Organisations of scientists are currently getting organised to discuss the objectives of the 7th research programms in Europe (ie militarisation, security solution, serving the industry more than civil society). And nanotechnologies and ICT implants are now surfacing in ethicists reports that claim they could be used for surveillance and manipulation (see the press release: http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?info=EXLINK&reference=MEMO/05/97&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=de
Ethical aspects of ICT implants in the human body: opinion presented to the Commission by the European Group on Ethics )
Below a link to the website of the European Science Social Forum Network, where a critical petition regarding this programm can be signed: http://www.essfnetwork.org/index.html
EXCERPT of the presentation:
The Framework Programs (FP) of the European Union (EU) are documents that set the guidelines ruling the budgetary distribution between the different research areas over periods of 4 to 6 years. They set the prioritary thematics and key technologies that will be preferentially financed by the EU. At present, the EU is defining the FP7 which will be effective from 2007 to 2013. The FP7 is not yet ready, but apparently it will follow the spirit of the FP6, being largely influenced by industrial competitiveness and buissness grouping interests. Besides, the new conception of 'European security' reflects militar interests also influencing the FP7.
The ESSF thinks that Europe deserves better, and that another research agenda is possible. Thus, we propose a set of guidelines standing for another model of scientific and technological progres, oriented to fulfill societal well-beeing, enviromental sustainability and global justice.
EXCERPT of the petition : http://www.essfnetwork.org/fp7doc.html
Nanotechnology was prominent in FP6 and is likely to be even more prominent in FP7 in convergence with bio- and info- technologies and cognitive neurosciences. Although it may offer exciting new vistas in e.g. medicine, it is likely to be of little use in creating an appropriate technology that will help the majority of the world's inhabitants. The sinister applications of nanotechnology to uses such as controlling individuals and armaments have to be regulated by international agreements - again an example where public control of research is important.
Besides, the report by the UK organisation "Scientists for Global Responsibility" against militarisation of research is quoted: Chris Langley, 2005. Soldiers in the Laboratory, Scientists for Global Responsibility, London. Jan 2005. http://www.sgr.org.uk/DownloadFormArms.htm
Regards,
NL
Omega - 4. Apr, 11:27
