Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:31:35.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Biological Revolution and Its Cultural Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Howard L. Kaye
Howard L. Kaye
Affiliation:
Franklin and Marshall College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a recent article in Commentary, American medical sociologist Florence Ruderman observes that the evolution of medical practice and medical attitudes in the United States has been guided largely by the autonomous development of biomedical science and technology. “Science”, she asserts:

… is a profoundly unsettling force … it causes endless dislocations and conflicts. Most basically, science is a source of independent values, motives, norms of conduct, and criteria of judgment. It sets its own course, defines its own goals. As for technology, its impact on medicine is even more obvious and direct; again, not just in producing tools or power but in transmitting values and in shaping the field from within. One need only think of the artificial-heart cases now in the news to realize that the physicians involved … are impelled by a technological drive that has its own logic and values, its own momentum—and its own dangers (24,45).

Type
The Cultural Shaping of Biomedical Science and Technology
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , February 1986 , pp. 275 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Allen, G.Life science in the twentieth century. New York: Wiley, 1975.Google Scholar
2.Barzun, J.Science: The glorious entertainment. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.Google Scholar
3.Chorover, S. L.From genesis to genocide. Cambridge, MA: M.l.T. Press, 1979.Google Scholar
4.Crick, F.of molecules and men. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1966.Google Scholar
5.Fleming, D.On living in a biological revolution. Atlantic, 1969, 223, 64–70.Google Scholar
6.Fleming, D. Emigré physicists and the biological revolution. In Fleming, D. & Bailyn, B. (eds.), The intellectual migration: Europe and America 1930–1960. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969, 152–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Fox, R. C.The courage to fail. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.Google Scholar
8.Fox, R.Of inhuman nature and unnatural rights. Encounter, 04 1982, 47–53.Google Scholar
9.Graham, L. R.Between science and values. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Handler, P. (ed.) Biology and the future of man. New York: Oxford University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
11.Jacob, F.The logic of life: a history of heredity. New York: Pantheon Books, 1973.Google Scholar
12.Judson, H. F.The eighth day of creation. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979.Google Scholar
13.Kass, L. R.Toward a more natural science: Biology and human affairs. New York: Free Press, 1985.Google Scholar
14.Kaye, H. L.The social meaning of modern biology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
15.Keller, E. F.A feeling for the organism. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1983.Google Scholar
16.Lasch, C.The culture of narcissism. New York: W. W. Norton, 1978.Google Scholar
17.Lasch, C.The minimal self: Psychic survival in troubled times. New York: W. W. Norton, 1984.Google Scholar
18.Lederberg, J. Biological future of man. In Wolstenholme, G. (ed.). Man and his future. Boston: Little, Brown, 1963, 263–73.Google Scholar
19.Lowrance, W. W.Modern science and human values. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
20.Monod, J.Chance and necessity. New York: Knopf, 1971.Google Scholar
21.Olby, R.Francis Crick, DNA, and the central Dogma. Daedalus. 1970. 99, 938–87.Google Scholar
22.Potter, V. R.Bioethics: Bridge to the future. Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971.Google Scholar
23.Roddick, N.Disaster movies: Only the stars survive. Times Literary Supplement, 14 03 1980, 297–300.Google Scholar
24.Ruderman, F. A.A misdiagnosis of American medicine. Commentary, 01 1986, 43–49.Google Scholar
25.Sinsheimer, R. L. Prospects for future scientific developments: Ambush or opportunity. In Hilton, B., Callahan, D. et al. , (eds.), Ethical issues in human genetics. New York: Plenum Press, 1973. 341–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Stent, G. S.The coming of the golden age. Garden City, N.Y.: Natural History Press, 1969.Google Scholar
27.Stent, G. S.Paradoxes of progress. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1978.Google Scholar
28.Waddington, C. H.The ethical animal. London: Allen & Unwin, 1960.Google Scholar
29.Waddington, C. H., ed. Biology and the history of the future. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press, 1972.Google Scholar
30.Wilkins, M. H. F. Introduction. In Fuller, W. (ed.), The biological revolution: Social good or social evil? Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972, 3–10.Google Scholar
31.Wilson, E. O.Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
32.Wilson, E. O.On human nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.Google ScholarPubMed
33.Wolstenholme, G., ed. Man and his future. Boston: Little, Brown, 1963.Google Scholar