Philosophy of NanoTechnoScience

Nanoscientific research has been characterized as an “engineering way of being in science.” This mode of research calls for a philosophy of technoscience that investigates the four questions: i) What is the role of theory and theory-development in nanoscale research, and what kinds of theories are needed for nanotechnological development? ii) What are the preferred methods and tools and the associated modes of reasoning in nanoscientific research? iii) What is nanotechnoscience and how are its objects constituted? iv) What kind of knowledge do technoscientific researchers typically produce and communicate? The consideration of these questions yields a survey of nanotechnoscience in terms of disciplinary questions (a complex field partially disclosed by stretching closed theories), of methodology (constructions and qualitative judgments of likeness), of ontology (a thin conception of nature as unlimited potential), and of epistemology (acquisition and demonstration of capabilities). In all four cases, the strictly philosophical discussion leads to societal dimensions and questions of value.

[1]  M. Roukes,et al.  Plenty of room, indeed. , 2001, Scientific American.

[2]  Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent,et al.  Nanomachine : One Word for Three Different Paradigms , 2007 .

[3]  Jonathan Jackson,et al.  Public attitudes to nanotech in Europe and the United States , 2004, Nature materials.

[4]  A. Bokulich.  Heisenberg Meets Kuhn: Closed Theories and Paradigms* , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[5]  Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent,et al.  Two Cultures of Nanotechnology , 2004 .

[6]  Eric Winsberg,et al.  Handshaking Your Way to the Top: Simulation at the Nanoscale , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[7]  I. Hacking,et al.  Representing and Intervening. , 1986 .

[8]  Ashley Shew,et al.  Probing the history of scanning tunneling microscopy , 2004 .

[9]  Torsten Wilholt,et al.  Design Rules: Industrial Research and Epistemic Merit* , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[10]  Alfred Nordmann.  Molecular disjunctions : staking claims at the nanoscale , 2004 .

[11]  Lang Tran,et al.  Safe handling of nanotechnology , 2006, Nature.

[12]  Bernadette Bensaude‐Vincent.  THE BALANCE: BETWEEN CHEMISTRY AND POLITICS , 1992 .

[13]  Cyrus C. M. Mody.  How Probe Microscopists Became Nanotechnologists , 2004 .

[14]  Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent,et al.  The construction of a discipline: Materials science in the United States , 2001 .

[15]  R. Batterman.  "Fundamental Physics": Molecular Dynamics vs. Hydrodynamics , 2005 .

[16]  M. Eberhart.  Quantum Mechanics and Molecular Design in the Twenty First Century , 2002 .

[17]  A. Nordmann.  If and Then: A Critique of Speculative NanoEthics , 2007, The Ethics of Nanotechnology, Geoengineering and Clean Energy.

[18]  Alexei Grinbaum,et al.  Living with Uncertainty: Toward the Ongoing Normative Assessment of Nanotechnology , 2004 .

[19]  B. Latour.  Science in Action , 1987 .

[20]  Alfred Nordmann,et al.  Noumenal Technology: Reflections on the Incredible Tininess of Nano , 2005 .

[21]  T. W. Staley.  The Coding of Technical Images of Nanospace: Analogy, Disanalogy, and the Asymmetry of Worlds , 2008 .

[22]  N. J. Tao,et al.  Electron transport in molecular junctions , 2006, Nature nanotechnology.

[23]  Eric R. Scerri.  Have Orbitals Really Been Observed , 2000 .

[24]  H. Belting.  Bild-Anthropologie: Entwürfe für eine Bildwissenschaft , 2001 .

[25]  Eric Winsberg,et al.  A tale of two methods , 2009, Synthese.

[26]  Chen,et al.  Large On-Off Ratios and Negative Differential Resistance in a Molecular Electronic Device. , 1999, Science.

[27]  A. Nordmann.  Was ist TechnoWissenschaft? — Zum Wandel der Wissenschaftskultur am Beispiel von Nanoforschung und Bionik , 2005 .

[28]  G. Whitesides,et al.  Self-Assembly at All Scales , 2002, Science.

[29]  David Pantalony,et al.  Thing knowledge: A philosophy of scientific instruments , 2005 .

[30]  Alfred Nordmann,et al.  Collapse of distance : Epistemic strategies of science and technoscience , 2006 .

[31]  Sabine Maasen,et al.  Particle and Fibre Toxicology Toxicology as a Nanoscience? – Disciplinary Identities Reconsidered , 2022 .

[32]  M. Heidegger.  The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays , 1977 .

[33]  J. Schummer.  Ethics of Chemical Synthesis , 2002 .

[34]  M. Seah,et al.  Modelling of nanomechanical nanoindentation measurements using an AFM or nanoindenter for compliant layers on stiffer substrates , 2006 .

[35]  Alfred Nordmann.  Technology Naturalized: A Challenge to Design for the Human Scale , 2008 .

[36]  R. Giere.  The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science , 2003 .

[37]  R. Batterman.  Hydrodynamics versus Molecular Dynamics: Intertheory Relations in Condensed Matter Physics , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[38]  G. Böhme,et al.  Towards a Social Science of Nature , 1983 .

[39]  A. Nordmann.  Entflechtung — Ansätze zum Ethischgesellschaftlichen Umgang mit der Nanotechnologie , 2007 .

[40]  W. Stronge,et al.  Principles of Mechanics , 1993 .

[41]  Marcel Mayor,et al.  Nanotechnology: Assessment and Perspectives , 2006 .

[42]  P. Vermaas.  Nanoscale Technology: A Two-Sided Challenge for Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics , 2004 .