E.coili Arts Initiative

Team E.coili presents: Machine or life: a paradigm of synthetic biology

Showcasing existing collaborative and interdisciplinary practice across the arts and sciences helps to provide new thought in both fields. Our exhibition will provide stimulation and thought provocation in new directions that otherwise would not be accessed through only discussion and debate.

We have investigated how iGEM as a paradigmatic phenomenon is influencing the culture of scientific research and the implications this has for the world ‘external’ to science. Through a showcase of art works and film we aim to provoke thoughtful reflection in a broad audience. This reflection will culminate in a question and answer session and the opportunity for visitors to record personal reflections on video. The art will provide a basis for new ways to examine the social cultural and ethical impact of synthetic biology, the event will have two main themes; Garage biology and the language of synthetic biology.

The ‘garage biology’ movement that has arisen alongside synthetic biology demonstrates that science is breaking from the confines of the lab, and in the future this may have a democratising effect on scientific discovery. Equally the ‘garage biology’ movement has caused concern about security and related ethical issues; such concerns have been amplified as synthetic biology has grown up in a post 9/11 culture of securitisation. Our exhibition will allow the audience to consider both the positive and negative implications of garage biology as a movement and indeed we will consider if there is a ‘garage biology movement’ at all.

The social and cultural effects of language used in science communication are key in forging perceptions. Specific sets of language are used within MIT’s synthetic biology that often describe life using mechanical words. These words are a legacy of synthetic biology’s close association with engineering. Are we experiencing the reductionism of life on a similar scale to that seen in the enlightenment? If so, should we expect reaction on a par with the romanticists? In fact, if we are experiencing such similarity in historical paradigm of thinking, can we learn from the lessons of the past? Is due consideration for the outward image of science being applied? Finally after exploring the intricacies of such linguistic subtleties from a historical and societal perspective we will be able to make an informed answer to the question: Are we really considering the lessons of the past to inform our going forward?