Ethic is very important. In Artificial life... why artificial... life is life, no more else.

Unusual question for Research Gate. I can answer the second part straight away. The answer is probably : "No." To change this, I think we must first stop using "nanoscale science" and "nanotechnology" as interchangeable terms and restrict "nanotechnology" to commercial applications that exist outside the research community. Then, depending on real opportunities and risks, fundamental ethical questions may arise, like those surrounding, for example, genetic engineering and nuclear powers generation. For nanoscale science, the principles and values are the same as for any science. I would say, knowledge should be the only guiding value in its own right, as long as the process of its creation does not conflict with legal or basic ethical principles that should take priority. This is regulated by both the law and by the existence of ethics commissions in most scientifically active countries. Obviously, these regulations differ across the globe and are subject to change. I don't think there is the need to bring in something new and fundamentally different to cope with the ethical challenges posed by nanoscale science. If anything, the regulatory bodies appear to be somewhat ahead of the science. For example, I needed to explain to the ERC ethics commission a few years ago why my proposed research was unlikely to create artificial life. Needless to say, that possibility had not even occurred to me, and it is factually quite hard to categorically exclude the possibility of creating life. After all, it has happened before in Nature.

Ethic is very important. In Artificial life... why artificial... life is life, no more else.

Great point of view Pritam Kumar Panda