Bioconstructed bodies: a citizen engagement exercise to imagine and domesticate the bodies of tomorrow
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18046/recs.i26.2699Keywords:
Bioethics, Citizen Engagement Exercise, Prospective methods, Anthropology of the body, Cyborgs, Transhumanism, Commodification of the body, Organ TraffickingAbstract
The following article analyses how a group of undergraduate students imagines the future based on two case studies that focus on the transformation of the human body using biomedical technologies and robotic prosthetics. Prospective qualitative methods were used to design a citizen engagement exercise that encouraged participants to share their expectations and reflect on the ethical problems that could emerge, when these bodies become a reality in Colombia in the year 2034. This paper aims to build bridges between the fields of bioethics, anthropology and the social studies of science and technology, to reflect on the potential impact that the use of medical technology and robotic artifacts would have on the moral values and cultural categories that Colombians will use to interpret the nature of the human body in the future.
Downloads
References
Andrews, L. y Dorothy, N. (1998). Whose Body Is It Anyway? Disputes Over Body Tissue in a Biotechnology Age. The Lancet, 351, 53-57.
Apligraf. (2018). What is Apligraf? Recuperado de http://www.apligraf.com/patient/what_is_apligraf/how_is_apligraf_applied.html
Bess, M. (2008). Icarus 2.0: A Historian’s Perspective on Human Biological Enhancement. Technology and culture, 49(1), 114-126.
Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K. y Van Lente, H. (2006). The Sociology of Expectations in Science and Technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3-4), 285-298.
Brown, N. y Michael, M. (2003). A Sociology of Expectations: Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(1), 3-18.
Brown, N., Rip, A. y Van Lente, H. (2003). Expectations in & about Science and Technology. Recuperado de https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46671758_Expectations_in_About_Science_and_Technology
BBC News. (2013). The day I’ve got my sight back. Recuperado de http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/galleries/p01j0h7k
Cohen, L. (2003). Where It Hurts: Indian Material for an Ethics of Organ Transplantation. Zygon. Journal of Science and Religion, 38(3), 136-165.
Congreso de la República de Colombia (2016). Ley 1805 de 2016: Por medio de la cual se modifican la Ley 73 de 1988 y la Ley 919 de 2004 en materia de donación de componentes anatómicos y se dictan otras disposiciones. Recuperado de http://es.presidencia.gov.co/normativa/normativa/LEY%201805%20DEL%2004%20DE%20AGOSTO%20DE%202016.pdf
Detréz, C. (2002). El cuerpo-instrumento. En La construcción social del cuerpo (pp. 37-45). París: Points.
Douglas, M. (1973). Las abominaciones del Levítico. En Pureza y peligro. Un análisis de los conceptos de contaminación y tabú (pp. 63-81). Madrid: Siglo Veintiuno.
Everett, M. (2007). The ‘I’ in the Gene: Divided Property, Fragmented Personhood and the Making of a Genetic Privacy Law. American Ethnologist, 34(2), 375-386.
Felt, U., Fochler, M. y Winkler, P. (2010). Coming to Terms with Biomedical Technologies in Different Techno Political Cultures: A Comparative Analysis of Focus Groups on Organ Transplantation and Genetic Testing in Austria, France, and the Netherlands. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35(4), 525-553.
Foucault, M. (2006). Clase del 11 de enero de 1978. En Seguridad, Territorio, Población (pp. 15-44). Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Frow, E. y Calvert, J. (2013). Opening Up the Future(s) of Synthetic Biology. Futures, 48, 32-43.
Haraway, D. (1990). A cyborg manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. En Simians, Cyborgs and Women. The reinvention of nature (pp. 149-182). New York: Routledge.
Kaku, M. (2013). A Scientist Predicts the Future. Recuperado de http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/28/opinion/kaku-a-scientist-predicts-thefuture.html?pagewanted=all
Le Breton, D. (2002). Antropología del cuerpo y modernidad. Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.
Lock, M. y Nguyen, V. K. (2010). The Social Life of Organs. En An anthropology of Biomedicine (pp. 205-228). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Maher, B. (2013). Tissue Engineering: How to Build a Heart. Nature: International Weekly Journal of Science. Recuperado de http://www.nature.com/news/tissue-engineering-how-to-build-a-heart-1.13327
Mauss, M. (1979). Técnicas y movimientos corporales. En Sociología y Antropología (pp. 337-356). Madrid: Tecnos.
Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. (2015). Datos Globales de Donación y Trasplantes, 2014. Recuperado de https://www.minsalud.gov.co/sites/rid/Lists/BibliotecaDigital/RIDE/VS/MET/Da tos-Globales-Donacion-Trasplantes.pdf
Montandon, A. (2010). Colourblind Eyeborg Colours to Sound. Recuperado de http://www.adammontandon.com/neil-harbisson-thecyborg/
Mousourakis, G. (2010). Body Commodification and the Human Organ Transfer in the Biotechnological Age: Philosophical and Ethico Legal Perspectives. Housei Riron, 43(1), 45-65.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2012). Biotechnology Promises and Expectations. En Emerging Biotechnologies: Technology, Choice and the Public Good (pp. 22-38). London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
Quiceno, N. (2016). Cuerpos: fuerzas divinas y humanas. En Vivir sabroso. Luchas y movimientos Afroatrateños, en Bojayá, Chocó, Colombia (pp. 91-133). Bogotá: Universidad del Rosario.
Selin, C. (2008). The Sociology of the Future: Tracing Stories of Technology and Time. Sociology Compass, 6(2), 1878-1895.
Scheper-Hughes, N. (2002). Bodies for Sale-Whole or In Parts. En N. Scheper-Hughes y L. Wacquant (eds.), Commodifying bodies (pp. 1-8). Londres: Sage Publications Ltd.
Sharp, L. (2000). The Commodification of the Body and its Parts. Annual Review of Anthropology, 29, 287-328.
Shimazono, Y. (2007). The State of the International Organ Trade: A Provisional Picture based on Integration of Available Information. Bulletin of World Health Organization. Vol. 85, No. 12. Visitado el 8 de julio de 2014. Disponible en: http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/12/06-039370/en/
Smits, M. (2006). Taming Monsters: The Cultural Domestication of New Technology. Technology in Society, 28, 489-504.
Sullivan, J. (2013). Printable ‘Bionic’ Ear Melds Electronics and Biology. Recuperado de http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S36/80/19M40/index.xml?section=t opstories
Texas Heart Institute. (2018). Regenerative Medicine Research. Recuperado de http://www.texasheart.org/Research/RegenerativeMedicine/index.cfm
Thaker, E. (2003). Data Made Flesh: Biotechnology and the Discourse of the Posthuman. Cultural Critique, 53, 72-97.
Vynt, S. (2011). Introduction: Science Fiction and Biopolitics. Science Fiction and Television, 4(2), 161-172.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Raquel Diaz-Bustamante
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
© Reserved Copyright
Material in this publication may be reproduced without authorization, provided the title, author and institutional source is acknowledged.
The content published in Revista CS is distributed under the Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0 Attribution/Recognition-NonCommercial 4.0 International license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
How to Cite
