首页> 外文期刊>Microbial Biotechnology >The rose and the name: the unresolved debate on biotechnological terms
【24h】

The rose and the name: the unresolved debate on biotechnological terms

机译:玫瑰和名称:未解决的生物技术争论

获取原文
           

摘要

Summary The largest survey on the perception of synthetic biology‐related disciplines (Porcar et al., 2019,EMBO Rep 20) recently revealed that the Spanish society does not have a very positive perception of the term synthetic biology. On the other hand, the terms biotechnology and even genetic engineering received relatively higher scores. The issue of nomenclature and perception is a classical one in science perception studies. Synthetic biologists have been debating their neologism (Synthetic Biology, from now on SB) for years. Even in a 2006 blog, Rob Carlson discussed the various labels for the new field, such as intentional biology, constructive biology, natural engineering, synthetic genomics and biological engineering. This diversity of names, along with the above mentioned negative public perception of the term synthetic biology, raises the question on whether the term itself is suitable or whether it could, in an extreme scenario, be replaced by another combining scientific consensus with public acceptance.
机译:总结了对合成生物学相关学科感知的最大调查(Porcar等,2019年,2019年,Embo Rep 20)最近透露,西班牙社会对综合生物学的术语没有非常积极的感知。另一方面,术语生物技术甚至基因工程甚至得到了相对较高的分数。命名和感知问题是科学认知研究的古典之一。合成生物学家一直在争论他们的新生(来自现在在SB的合成生物学)。即使在2006年博客中,Rob Carlson也讨论了新领域的各种标签,例如故意生物学,建设性生物学,自然工程,合成基因组学和生物工程。这种名称的多样性以及对综合生物学术语的负面性看法,提出了关于术语本身是否适合的问题,在极端情景中,在极端情景中被另一个与公众接受相结合的科学共识。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号