Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Nov;9(4):393-420.
doi: 10.1057/biosoc.2014.32.

Negotiating the dynamics of uncomfortable knowledge: The case of dual use and synthetic biology

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Negotiating the dynamics of uncomfortable knowledge: The case of dual use and synthetic biology

Claire Marris et al. Biosocieties. 2014 Nov.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Institutions need to ignore some knowledge in order to function. This is "uncomfortable knowledge" because it undermines the ability of those institutions to pursue their goals (Rayner, 2012). We identify three bodies of knowledge that are relevant to understandings of the dual use threat posed by synthetic biology but are excluded from related policy discussions. We demonstrate how these "unknown knowns" constitute uncomfortable knowledge because they disrupt the simplified worldview that underpins contemporary discourse on the potential misuse of synthetic biology by malign actors. We describe how these inconvenient truths have been systematically ignored and argue that this is because they are perceived as a threat by organisations involved in the promotion of synthetic biology as well as by those involved in managing biosecurity risks. This has led to a situation where concerns about the biosecurity threat posed by synthetic biology are not only exaggerated, but are, more importantly, misplaced. This, in turn, means that related policies are misdirected and unlikely to have much impact. We focus on the dynamics of discussions about synthetic biology and dual use to demonstrate how the same "knowns" that are denied or dismissed as "unknown knowns" in certain circumstances are sometimes mobilised as "known knowns" by the same category of actors in a different context, when this serves to sustain the goals of the individuals and institutions involved. Based on our own experience, we argue that negotiating the dynamics of uncomfortable knowledge is a difficult, but necessary, component of meaningful transdisciplinary collaborations.

Keywords: biosecurity; dual use; innovation; science and technology studies (STS); strategic ignorance; synthetic biology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Classifying honourable/dishonourable intent. Source: “2003 Synthetic Biology Study” (p. 16) by Drew Endy, licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-ND 3.0). Available from: hdl.handle.net/1721.1/38455
Figure 2
Figure 2
Gene and customer screening as advocated by the International Association Synthetic Biology. Source: Powerpoint presentation on “Synthetic Biology: Addressing Global Security” by Markus Fischer, representing the International Association Synthetic Biology (reproduced with the kind permission of Markus Fischer).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Traffic light portrayal of DNA sequence screening. Reprinted by permission from Macmillan Publishers, Ltd: Nature Biotechnology, Nouri, A. and Chyba, C. F., “Proliferation-resistant biotechnology: An approach to improve biological security” 27(3): pp. 234–236, p. 235, © 2009.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Balmer B. A secret formula, a rogue patent and public knowledge about nerve gas: Secrecy as a spatial-epistemic tool. Social Studies of Science. 2006;36 (5:691–722.
    1. Balmer B. Secrecy and Science: A Historical Sociology of Biological and Chemical Warfare. Farnham, UK: Ashgate; 2012.
    1. Ben Ouagrham-Gormley S. Barriers to bioweapons: Intangible obstacles to proliferation. International Security. 2012;36 (4:80–114.
    1. Ben Ouagrham-Gormley S. Barriers to Bioweapons: The Challenges of Expertise and Organization for Weapons Development. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 2014.
    1. Ben Ouagrham-Gormley S., Vogel K. The social context shaping bioweapons (non)proliferation. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science. 2010;8 (1:9–24. - PubMed