SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(121.1Kb)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-5554

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Participatory technology assessment of xenotransplantation: experimenting with the Neo-Socratic Dialogue ; Austrian experiences

Partizipative Technikfolgenabschätzung der Xenotransplantation: experimentieren mit dem Neosokratischen Dialog ; österreichische Erfahrungen
[journal article]

Griessler, Erich
Littig, Beate

Abstract

Like many developments in modern science and technology (Bonß 1995) xeno- or animal to human transplantation involves enormous potentials as well as high risks and serious ethical problems (e.g. OECD 1997, Hüsing 1998 et al. Schicktanz 2002). Such ethical problems are a major challenge to political ... view more

Like many developments in modern science and technology (Bonß 1995) xeno- or animal to human transplantation involves enormous potentials as well as high risks and serious ethical problems (e.g. OECD 1997, Hüsing 1998 et al. Schicktanz 2002). Such ethical problems are a major challenge to political decision-making mechanisms: how can they be appropriately and legitimately discussed and resolved? Are the usual democratic institutions adequate and is it sufficient to include only (bioethics)-experts in decision-making? Or do we need broader debates on ethics, involving also other actors as well as civil society. However, if a broad public discussion is necessary, how can we debate and resolve these questions, and which decision-making procedures can we use? This article presents first results of the Austrian part of an ongoing EU research project, which experiments with the Neo-Socratic Dialogue, (in the following NSD), a method for resolving ethical questions primarily used in teaching and consultancy, as a means of discussing ethical problems of xenotransplantation with the respective stakeholders. In this discussion paper we will first sketch several ethical problems of xenotransplantation. Drawing on Marteen Hajer (2003), we will then distinguish several aspects of "institutional void" in the Austrian xenotransplantation "debate". In the next part we will outline the concept of NSD and we will describe the Austrian experiment to discuss ethical problems of xenotransplantation using the instrument of NSD. In the subsequent part we will present first evaluation results of this experiment and in the last part we will draw preliminary conclusions from our experiment.... view less

Keywords
sociology of technology; Austria; discourse; medical technology; participation; morality; ethics; technology assessment

Classification
Sociology of Science, Sociology of Technology, Research on Science and Technology
Technology Assessment

Method
empirical

Document language
English

Publication Year
2003

Page/Pages
p. 56-67

Journal
Practical Philosophy, 6 (2003) 2

Status
Postprint; reviewed

Licence
Creative Commons - Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.