Bimonthly Progress Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Bimonthly Progress Report Bimonthly Progress Report Issue 1 April 2006 Message from Nick Introducing the Future of It is exciting to be able to send out Humanity Institute this first Bimonthly report on the activities of the FHI. As you can The FHI is an interdisciplinary research institute and is part of the new see from this report, we have got James Martin 21st Century School at the University of Oxford. It is off to a vigorous start even though located within the Faculty of Philosophy. we are not yet fully staffed. Established on 29th November 2005, the FHI aims to become The agenda for the Institute is humanity's best effort at understanding and evaluating its own long- ambitious indeed, and the problems term prospects by looking at how anticipated technological we want to tackle are colossal. To developments could affect the human condition. There are currently be effective, we will need to build a three broad research areas: human enhancement, global catastrophic larger team of top research talent. risks, and methodological issues that arise in the study of ‘big picture’ Finding the resources to do this is a issues. Our research is outlined in more detail on page 3. priority. The FHI takes a multi-disciplinary approach, using scientific I want to express our gratitude to research methods, philosophical techniques, ethical analysis, and the benefactors who have made it policy evaluation tools. We pursue an opportunistic research agenda, possible to get started: James in that we focus on those questions that are amenable to analysis, and Martin (who is mentioned again on where new insights would bring the greatest payoff in terms of page 2 of this report); and the improving humanity's ability to navigate its future. We are committed Bright Horizons Foundation and to the highest standards of scholarship and research, and we work to one anonymous philanthropist who facilitate public engagement and informed discussion among have contributed funding for our stakeholders in government, industry, academia, and the non-profit pilot program on global sector. catastrophic risk. There are currently five members of staff working at the FHI: our director, Dr Nick Bostrom; junior research fellow, Dr Rebecca Dr Nick Bostrom, Director, FHI Roache; research associate, Dr Anders Sandberg; projects coordinator, Jo Armitage; and projects officer, Miriam Wood. Find out more about us on page 5. 1 News Award for James Martin The Sheldon Medal has been Research awarded to Dr James Martin, in recognition for the funding he has Nick Bostrom has two books currently in progress: How Can Nature st Be Ethically Improved? (edited with Julian Savulescu), and Global provided for the James Martin 21 Catastrophic Risks (edited with Milan Cirkovic). Both are being Century School, which includes published by Oxford University Press. He also has five journal articles the FHI. A maximum of one medal and six contributed book chapters awaiting publication. A list of his is awarded each year. Dr Martin is recent publications is given on page 6. the third recipient of the medal, Anders Sandberg published a letter – ‘Epic gains to be had in with Lord Wolfson FBA, longer life’ – in the Financial Times on March 3rd, and also has a Chairman of the Wolfson forthcoming essay, ‘Doubting Ageing’, in the magazine Persuader, on Foundation and Mr Wafic Saïd the subject of life extension. Rebecca Roache’s paper, ‘A Defence of having been honoured in previous Quasi-Memory’, is forthcoming in Philosophy. years. The Chancellor, Lord Patten of Conferences, Seminars, and Committees Barnes, said: ‘This medal is reserved for those donors who Nick Bostrom has recently presented to The Royal Society for the have contributed in a very Encouragement of Arts, Manufacturers and Commerce, and to the significant way to the development Princeton Center for Human values, on topics related to the work of and strength of the University. It is the FHI. He has been invited to give keynote presentations later this only given to the University’s most year at Stanford; University of Utah; St Gallen, Switzerland; Tempe, generous and dedicated friends, Arizona; and Oxford. In addition, he is participating on the planning among whom we count Dr James committee for the Government Consultation Exercise on the Wider Martin.’ Implications of Science and Technology, organised by the Horizon Scanning Centre at the Office of Science and Technology. Further details about his presentations are given on page 7. Anders Sandberg presented ‘Biotechnology and the promise of tailor-made medicine’ at the Amigo Society, Brussels, in 21 February 2006; and ‘The Transhumanist Vision’ on March 9 at the Universidad de Alcalá de Henares as part of ‘Segundas Jornadas sobre Convergencia Ciencia-Tecnología,’ sponsored by the Vodafone Foundation. st 21 Century Advanced Research Seminars In conjunction with Oxford’s Program on the Ethics of the New Biosciences (BEP), the FHI runs a series of seminars during term time, which are open to scholars and Oxford graduate students. During each seminar, a speaker presents a paper that addresses a topic relevant to Dr Martin with the Sheldon Medal the research interests of the FHI or the BEP, and this is followed by a group discussion. Hilary Term sessions will take place on Tuesdays, 2-4pm, in the Lecture Room, Philosophy Faculty, 10 Merton Street. For further details about the seminar series, or to receive advance copies of the papers, please contact Miriam Wood ([email protected]). Media Since its creation last year, the FHI has attracted media attention on an international scale. In the UK, Nick Bostrom has been interviewed about the FHI’s work by – among others – The Observer, The Guardian, The Sunday Times, The New Scientist, the BBC, and Channel 4. In addition, he has been interviewed on radio, television, and in print in the USA, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, Russia, Brazil, and Central America. For a complete list of recent media appearances, please see page 7. 2 More About the FHI FHI Research Programmes FHI Hosts International Methodology Workshop The Institute addresses three broad research areas: human transformation, th global catastrophic risk, and the future of intelligent life. Within these On 13 March, in advance of the areas, we have an initial portfolio of six research programmes: James Martin Institute inaugural 2006 World Forum, the FHI held a Area 1: Ethics and Human Enhancement ‘Big Issues for Humanity’ 1 Human potential. Questions include: advanced methodology workshop. • How can we use science, medicine, and technology to improve human Speakers included Joel Garreau cognitive performance, healthy lifespan, mood and motivation, and (Washington Post), Julian reproductive choices? How do different kinds of interventions interact? Savulescu (University of Oxford), • How can we predict whether an intervention will genuinely improve James Hughes (Trinity College, our lives? Connecticut), William Bainbridge 2 Ethics, judgments, and public perception of human enhancement. (National Science Foundation), and Questions include: Nick Bostrom (FHI). • How do different demographics and cultures evaluate possible changes in the human condition? What factors influence these evaluations? Are there common biases and errors? Can critical normative analysis help reduce biases and errors? How are concepts such as dignity, authenticity, nature, and justice to be understood in this context? • What are the implications for public policy? 3 ENHANCE: Enhancing Human Capacities: Ethics, Regulation and European Policy This is a multinational research project funded by the European Commission, in collaboration the University of Stockholm, University of Clockwise from left: Anders Sandberg, Maastricht, and University Vita Saluta-San Raffaele. The objective is to Julian Savulescu, Joel Garreau, Rebecca conduct a scientific review of enhancement technologies to extend Roache, Justin Holme, Nicholas Shackel, lifespan, or to improve cognition, mood, or physical performance, in the Toby Ord, James Hughes. near- to mid-term, and to perform an ethical evaluation of these prospects. The FHI also participated in the Area 2: Global Catastropic Risk World Forum, which is to be held 4 Mapping global catastrophic risk. Questions include: every other year. It was a great • What are the biggest threats to the survival of the human species? success and was attended by Which other risks could have globally catastrophic ramifications? How scholars from around the world and probable are such disasters? What methodological tools are needed to watched by hundreds more via live study them? webcast. It was covered in the • Are there cost-effective ways to reduce risks? media, including a discussion on BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze and an Area 3: Methodology and the Future of Intelligent Life article in The Guardian. 5 Radical future technologies. Questions include: • What impact would technologies such as molecular manufacturing or artificial intelligence have on our future? • How much can we know about the probability and time-scale of the development of radical technologies? 6 Indirect arguments and constraints. Questions include: • What are the long-term consequences of changing human nature? What does the big picture look like? Dystopian and utopian scenarios? • What can we conclude from alleged probabilistic coherence-constraints such as the simulation argument, the doomsday argument, and considerations related to the Fermi paradox? 3 Good, Better, Enhanced A research update from
Recommended publications
  • Effective Altruism William Macaskill and Theron Pummer
    1 Effective Altruism William MacAskill and Theron Pummer Climate change is on course to cause millions of deaths and cost the world economy trillions of dollars. Nearly a billion people live in extreme poverty, millions of them dying each year of easily preventable diseases. Just a small fraction of the thousands of nuclear weapons on hair‐trigger alert could easily bring about global catastrophe. New technologies like synthetic biology and artificial intelligence bring unprece­ dented risks. Meanwhile, year after year billions and billions of factory‐farmed ani­ mals live and die in misery. Given the number of severe problems facing the world today, and the resources required to solve them, we may feel at a loss as to where to even begin. The good news is that we can improve things with the right use of money, time, talent, and effort. These resources can bring about a great deal of improvement, or very little, depending on how they are allocated. The effective altruism movement consists of a growing global community of peo­ ple who use reason and evidence to assess how to do as much good as possible, and who take action on this basis. Launched in 2011, the movement now has thousands of members, as well as influence over billions of dollars. The movement has substan­ tially increased awareness of the fact that some altruistic activities are much more cost‐effective than others, in the sense that they do much more good than others per unit of resource expended. According to the nonprofit organization GiveWell, it costs around $3,500 to prevent someone from dying of malaria by distributing bed­ nets.
    [Show full text]
  • Understandings of Genomic Research in Developing
    Traore et al. BMC Medical Ethics (2015) 16:42 DOI 10.1186/s12910-015-0035-7 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Understandings of genomic research in developing countries: a qualitative study of the views of MalariaGEN participants in Mali Karim Traore1, Susan Bull2*, Alassane Niare1, Salimata Konate1, Mahamadou A. Thera1, Dominic Kwiatkowski3, Michael Parker2 and Ogobara K. Doumbo1 Abstract Background: Obtaining informed consent for participation in genomic research in low-income settings presents specific ethical issues requiring attention. These include the challenges that arise when providing information about unfamiliar and technical research methods, the implications of complicated infrastructure and data sharing requirements, and the potential consequences of future research with samples and data. This study investigated researchers’ and participants’ parents’ experiences of a consent process and understandings of a genome-wide association study of malaria involving children aged five and under in Mali. It aimed to inform best practices in recruiting participants into genomic research. Methods: A qualitative rapid ethical assessment was undertaken. Fifty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted with the parents of research participants. An additional nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior research scientists, research assistants and with a member of an ethics committee. A focus group with five parents of research participants and direct observations of four consent processes were also conducted. French and translated English transcripts were descriptively and thematically coded using OpenCode software. Results: Participants’ parents in the MalariaGEN study had differing understandings of the causes of malaria, the rationale for collecting blood samples, the purposes of the study and the kinds of information the study would generate.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT This Copy of the Thesis Has Been
    University of Plymouth PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk 04 University of Plymouth Research Theses 01 Research Theses Main Collection 2012 Life Expansion: Toward an Artistic, Design-Based Theory of the Transhuman / Posthuman Vita-More, Natasha http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/1182 University of Plymouth All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author. COPYRIGHT STATEMENT This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognize that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author’s prior consent. 1 Life Expansion: Toward an Artistic, Design-Based Theory of the Transhuman / Posthuman by NATASHA VITA-MORE A thesis submitted to the University of Plymouth in partial fulfillment for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Art & Media Faculty of Arts April 2012 2 Natasha Vita-More Life Expansion: Toward an Artistic, Design-Based Theory of the Transhuman / Posthuman The thesis’ study of life expansion proposes a framework for artistic, design-based approaches concerned with prolonging human life and sustaining personal identity. To delineate the topic: life expansion means increasing the length of time a person is alive and diversifying the matter in which a person exists.
    [Show full text]
  • Apocalypse Now? Initial Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic for the Governance of Existential and Global Catastrophic Risks
    journal of international humanitarian legal studies 11 (2020) 295-310 brill.com/ihls Apocalypse Now? Initial Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic for the Governance of Existential and Global Catastrophic Risks Hin-Yan Liu, Kristian Lauta and Matthijs Maas Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract This paper explores the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic through the framework of exis- tential risks – a class of extreme risks that threaten the entire future of humanity. In doing so, we tease out three lessons: (1) possible reasons underlying the limits and shortfalls of international law, international institutions and other actors which Covid-19 has revealed, and what they reveal about the resilience or fragility of institu- tional frameworks in the face of existential risks; (2) using Covid-19 to test and refine our prior ‘Boring Apocalypses’ model for understanding the interplay of hazards, vul- nerabilities and exposures in facilitating a particular disaster, or magnifying its effects; and (3) to extrapolate some possible futures for existential risk scholarship and governance. Keywords Covid-19 – pandemics – existential risks – global catastrophic risks – boring apocalypses 1 Introduction: Our First ‘Brush’ with Existential Risk? All too suddenly, yesterday’s ‘impossibilities’ have turned into today’s ‘condi- tions’. The impossible has already happened, and quickly. The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, both directly and as manifested through the far-reaching global societal responses to it, signal a jarring departure away from even the © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/18781527-01102004Downloaded from Brill.com09/27/2021 12:13:00AM via free access <UN> 296 Liu, Lauta and Maas recent past, and suggest that our futures will be profoundly different in its af- termath.
    [Show full text]
  • Existential Risk and Existential Hope: Definitions
    Future of Humanity Institute – Technical Report #2015-1 Existential Risk and Existential Hope: Definitions Owen Cotton-Barratt* & Toby Ord† We look at the strengths and weaknesses of two existing definitions of existential risk, and suggest a new definition based on expected value. This leads to a parallel concept: ‘existential hope’, the chance of something extremely good happening. An existential risk is a chance of a terrible event occurring, such as an asteroid striking the earth and wiping out intelligent life – we could call such events existential catastrophes. In order to understand what should be thought of as an existential risk, it is necessary to understand what should be thought of as an existential catastrophe. This is harder than it first seems to pin down. 1. The simple definition One fairly crisp approach is to draw the line at extinction: Definition (i): An existential catastrophe is an event which causes the end of existence of our descendants. This has the virtue that it is a natural division and is easy to understand. And we certainly want to include all extinction events. But perhaps it doesn’t cast a wide enough net. Example A: A totalitarian regime takes control of earth. It uses mass surveillance to prevent any rebellion, and there is no chance for escape. This regime persists for thousands of years, eventually collapsing when a supervolcano throws up enough ash that agriculture is prevented for decades, and no humans survive. In Example A, clearly the eruption was bad, but the worst of the damage was done earlier. After the totalitarian regime was locked in, it was only a matter of time until something or other finished things off.
    [Show full text]
  • Practical Ethics, Third Edition
    This page intentionally left blank Practical Ethics Third Edition For thirty years, Peter Singer’s Practical Ethics has been the classic introduction to applied ethics. For this third edition, the author has revised and updated all the chapters and added a new chapter addressing climate change, one of the most important ethical chal- lenges of our generation. Some of the questions discussed in this book concern our daily lives. Is it ethical to buy luxuries when others do not have enough to eat? Should we buy meat produced from intensively reared animals? Am I doing something wrong if my carbon footprint is above the global average? Other questions confront us as concerned citizens: equality and discrimination on the grounds of race or sex; abortion, the use of embryos for research, and euthanasia; political violence and terrorism; and the preservation of our planet’s environment. This book’s lucid style and provocative arguments make it an ideal text for university courses and for anyone willing to think about how she or he ought to live. Peter Singer is currently Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. He is the author or editor of more than forty books, including Animal Liberation (1975), Rethinking Life and Death (1996) and, most recently, The Life You Can Save (2009). In 2005, he was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time magazine. Practical Ethics Third Edition PETER SINGER Princeton University and the University of Melbourne cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao˜ Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo, Mexico City Cambridge University Press 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, ny 10013-2473, usa www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521707688 C Peter Singer 1980, 1993, 2011 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Rolston on Animals, Ethics, and the Factory Farm
    [Expositions 6.1 (2012) 29–40] Expositions (online) ISSN: 1747–5376 Unnaturally Cruel: Rolston on Animals, Ethics, and the Factory Farm CHRISTIAN DIEHM University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point In 2010, over nine billion animals were killed in the United States for human consumption. This included nearly 1 million calves, 2.5 million sheep and lambs, 34 million cattle, 110 million hogs, 242 million turkeys, and well over 8.7 billion chickens (USDA 2011a; 2011b). Though hundreds of slaughterhouses actively contributed to these totals, more than half of the cattle just mentioned were killed at just fourteen plants. A slightly greater percentage of hogs was killed at only twelve (USDA 2011a). Chickens were processed in a total of three hundred and ten federally inspected facilities (USDA 2011b), which means that if every facility operated at the same capacity, each would have slaughtered over fifty-three birds per minute (nearly one per second) in every minute of every day, adding up to more than twenty-eight million apiece over the course of twelve months.1 Incredible as these figures may seem, 2010 was an average year for agricultural animals. Indeed, for nearly a decade now the total number of birds and mammals killed annually in the US has come in at or above the nine billion mark, and such enormous totals are possible only by virtue of the existence of an equally enormous network of industrialized agricultural suppliers. These high-volume farming operations – dubbed “factory farms” by the general public, or “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)” by state and federal agencies – are defined by the ways in which they restrict animals’ movements and behaviors, locate more and more bodies in less and less space, and increasingly mechanize many aspects of traditional husbandry.
    [Show full text]
  • Whether and Where to Give1 (Forthcoming in Philosophy and Public Affairs)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by St Andrews Research Repository 1 Whether and Where to Give1 (Forthcoming in Philosophy and Public Affairs) Theron Pummer University of St Andrews 1. The Ethics of Giving and Effective Altruism The ethics of giving has traditionally focused on whether, and how much, to give to charities helping people in extreme poverty.2 In more recent years, the discussion has increasingly focused on where to give, spurred by an appreciation of the substantial differences in cost- effectiveness between charities. According to a commonly cited example, $40,000 can be used either to help 1 blind person by training a seeing-eye dog in the United States or to help 2,000 blind people by providing surgeries reversing the effects of trachoma in Africa.3 Effective altruists recommend that we give large sums to charity, but by far their more central message is that we give effectively, i.e., to whatever charities would do the most good per dollar donated.4 In this paper, I’ll assume that it’s not wrong not to give bigger, but will explore to what extent it may well nonetheless be wrong not to give better. The main claim I’ll argue for here is that in many cases it would be wrong of you to give a sum of money to charities that do less good than others you could have given to instead, even if 1 I am extremely grateful to Derek Parfit, Roger Crisp, Jeff McMahan, and Peter Singer for extremely helpful feedback and encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • Between Ape and Artilect Createspace V2
    Between Ape and Artilect Conversations with Pioneers of Artificial General Intelligence and Other Transformative Technologies Interviews Conducted and Edited by Ben Goertzel This work is offered under the following license terms: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC-BY-NC-ND-3.0) See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details Copyright © 2013 Ben Goertzel All rights reserved. ISBN: ISBN-13: “Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman – a rope over an abyss.” -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra Table&of&Contents& Introduction ........................................................................................................ 7! Itamar Arel: AGI via Deep Learning ................................................................. 11! Pei Wang: What Do You Mean by “AI”? .......................................................... 23! Joscha Bach: Understanding the Mind ........................................................... 39! Hugo DeGaris: Will There be Cyborgs? .......................................................... 51! DeGaris Interviews Goertzel: Seeking the Sputnik of AGI .............................. 61! Linas Vepstas: AGI, Open Source and Our Economic Future ........................ 89! Joel Pitt: The Benefits of Open Source for AGI ............................................ 101! Randal Koene: Substrate-Independent Minds .............................................. 107! João Pedro de Magalhães: Ending Aging ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Why Maximize Expected Choice-Worthiness?1 WILLIAM MACASKILL and TOBY ORD University of Oxford
    NOUSˆ 00:00 (2018) 1–27 doi: 10.1111/nous.12264 Why Maximize Expected Choice-Worthiness?1 WILLIAM MACASKILL AND TOBY ORD University of Oxford This paper argues in favor of a particular account of decision-making under nor- mative uncertainty: that, when it is possible to do so, one should maximize expected choice-worthiness. Though this position has been often suggested in the literature and is often taken to be the ‘default’ view, it has so far received little in the way of positive argument in its favor. After dealing with some preliminaries and giving the basic motivation for taking normative uncertainty into account in our decision- making, we consider and provide new arguments against two rival accounts that have been offered—the accounts that we call ‘My Favorite Theory’ and ‘My Fa- vorite Option’. We then give a novel argument for comparativism—the view that, under normative uncertainty, one should take into account both probabilities of different theories and magnitudes of choice-worthiness. Finally, we further argue in favor of maximizing expected choice-worthiness and consider and respond to five objections. Introduction Normative uncertainty is a fact of life. Suppose that Michael has £20 to spend. With that money, he could eat out at a nice restaurant. Alternatively, he could eat at home and pay for four long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets that would protect eight children against malaria. Let’s suppose that Michael knows all the morally relevant empirical facts about what that £20 could do. Even so, it might be that he still doesn’t know whether he’s obligated to donate that money or whether it’s permissible for him to pay for the meal out, because he just doesn’t know how strong his moral obligations to distant strangers are.
    [Show full text]
  • The Definition of Effective Altruism
    OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 19/08/19, SPi 1 The Definition of Effective Altruism William MacAskill There are many problems in the world today. Over 750 million people live on less than $1.90 per day (at purchasing power parity).1 Around 6 million children die each year of easily preventable causes such as malaria, diarrhea, or pneumonia.2 Climate change is set to wreak environmental havoc and cost the economy tril- lions of dollars.3 A third of women worldwide have suffered from sexual or other physical violence in their lives.4 More than 3,000 nuclear warheads are in high-alert ready-to-launch status around the globe.5 Bacteria are becoming antibiotic- resistant.6 Partisanship is increasing, and democracy may be in decline.7 Given that the world has so many problems, and that these problems are so severe, surely we have a responsibility to do something about them. But what? There are countless problems that we could be addressing, and many different ways of addressing each of those problems. Moreover, our resources are scarce, so as individuals and even as a globe we can’t solve all these problems at once. So we must make decisions about how to allocate the resources we have. But on what basis should we make such decisions? The effective altruism movement has pioneered one approach. Those in this movement try to figure out, of all the different uses of our resources, which uses will do the most good, impartially considered. This movement is gathering con- siderable steam. There are now thousands of people around the world who have chosen
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Ethics: Global Cases, Practice, and Context
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Springer - Publisher Connector Chapter 1 Public Health Ethics: Global Cases, Practice, and Context Leonard W. Ortmann , Drue H. Barrett , Carla Saenz , Ruth Gaare Bernheim , Angus Dawson , Jo A. Valentine , and Andreas Reis 1.1 Introduction Introducing public health ethics poses two special challenges. First, it is a relatively new fi eld that combines public health and practical ethics . Its unfamiliarity requires considerable explanation, yet its scope and emergent qualities make delineation dif- fi cult. Moreover, while the early development of public health ethics occurred in a Western context, its reach, like public health itself, has become global. A second challenge, then, is to articulate an approach specifi c enough to provide clear The opinions, fi ndings, and conclusions of the authors do not necessarily refl ect the offi cial posi- tion, views, or policies of the editors, the editors’ host institutions, or the authors’ host institutions. L. W. Ortmann , PhD (*) • D. H. Barrett , PhD Offi ce of Scientifi c Integrity, Offi ce of the Associate Director for Science, Offi ce of the Director , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA e-mail: [email protected] C. Saenz , PhD Regional Program on Bioethics, Offi ce of Knowledge Management, Bioethics, and Research , Pan American Health Organization , Washington , DC , USA R. G. Bernheim , JD, MPH Department of Public Health Sciences , University of Virginia , Charlottesville , VA , USA A. Dawson , PhD Center for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sydney School of Public Health , The University of Sydney , Sydney , Australia J.
    [Show full text]