Bioethics and/in art
Posted on | August 10, 2009 | Comments Off
Ainārs Kamoliņš and Jānis Liepiņš
In our presentation we will speak about possibilities how certain practices in art – an application of tools used in biology – can change our notions of bioethics. Normally we have utilitarian approach to science as opposite to art which is in a sense parasitic to scientific knowledge. Bio art – which largely subsists on scientific practice –is guided by the same ethical principles as science and can be politically influenced at the same extent as other innovative processes in biology. Therefore it is legitimate to suppose that specific kind of art practices can contribute to ethical discussions held in field of science. Is this really so or the option is being second-rated righteously?
First approach – that there are no interesting contributions stemming from the art field – could be based on reasoning that bio art is derivative or even parasitic scientific practice. In that regard we can ask: whether art (bio art) and creative use of bio technologies can contribute to life sciences at all? Should we condemn engagement with living being for purely aesthetic reasons as it is seen in the light of for instance discussions based on notion of ‘intrinsic values’? Also we can always ask: is there any substantial difference between Orlan and average surgical operations? Green glowing bunny and everyday experiments on animals in laboratories? Video art and documentaries? There are many examples when substantial difference is based only on artistic manifestations and in these cases discussions can be only nominal and therefore bio art as such can not provide us with interesting discussions in bioethics.
In the more optimistic scenario we can adopt second approach i.e., that art actually can provide interesting and original discussions on bioethics, in spite of doubts that many artists who used bio technologies in creating art works had in fact made any original contribution.
Bio art can be seen as an ideal tool for demonstrating that we need to shift our attention from established bioethics – which is based on jurisprudence – to more phenomenological approach. i.e. the questions of presence, aesthetical experience (or as in case of instable art – so called ‘temporal aesthetic zones’), our relationships with the Other and so on, as phenomenological discussions on artifacts can provide proper basis for case-sensitive interpretations in order to show intrinsic problems of bioethics.