Within the path of a Gaia-like concept of your world” (Dupr2007, 200, cf. Committee on Metagenomics 2007, 139 my emphasis).u A further way in which metagenomics could endorse a more respectful approach to all-natural systems is by confronting us together with the essential function of microbes in fulfilling all sorts of very significant human requires: the purification of drinking water, the development of new medicines, and so on. (cf. Handelsman 2007, eight). From this angle, metagenomics could even encourage us to embrace an image of nature that is definitely connected with all the mythical image from the Earth as a nurturing mother (cf. Merchant 1989). We’re as a result reminded from the truth that we humans “are not merely cultural beings but additionally organic beings, just as dependent on a healthy biosphere as other forms of life” (Plumwood 2002, 99). Therefore, one could possibly say, even the field’s big prospective for items and applications will not necessarily should go hand in hand with instrumental approaches to nature, but might, on the contrary, function as a basis for respect. But all this is no more than hope for the future. As Rogers argues: “The reconstruction of a diverse connection towards the environment in which we live requires radically alternative conceptions of humans, nature, material situations, and discourse” (Rogers 1998, 268) (Figure 1).Figure 1 Overview of the study parties involved within the Dutch ecogenomics neighborhood.Van der Hout Life Sciences, Society and Policy 2014, 10:ten http:www.lsspjournal.comcontent101Page 14 ofEndnotes a Inside the work of Richard Rogers, we are able to uncover a similar argument: “Our theories do matter for the extent that they are developed within a certain historical context, current in a web of ideological affiliations, and potentially successful within the social and organic worlds. We should thus take them PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21310042 seriously nor just as a lot more babel in the ivory tower, nor as ends in themselves, but as part of the ongoing construction of how the planet, human beings, and social activity can and must operate” (Rogers 1998, 269). b With all the term `interview’, I refer to semi-structured philosophical conversations that I had with several of the crucial players within the Dutch ecogenomics field. c Leopold’s use from the term `paradox’ seems to become somewhat misleading, because the views he describes look to refer to `normal’ (i.e. non-paradoxical) oppositions. d In concert with my interviewees, I have decided to mention the researchers and institutes involved, by name. This not just makes my analysis verifiable, but additionally enhances the tangibility and liveliness of your discussion. e Netherlands Genomics Initiative [http:www.genomics.nlHomeNGIHistory. aspx] accessed 13 September 2013. f Other key participants were Nico van Straalen, professor of animal ecology at VU University Amsterdam; Hans Westerhoff, professor of microbial physiology, also at VU; Hans van Veen, head of your department of microbial ecology at the Netherlands Institute of Ecology; Jan Kammenga, assistant professor at the laboratory of nematology of Wageningen University. g The term `ecological genomics’ was introduced by the Israeli biology professor Eviatar Nevo (1998). The abbreviation `ecogenomics’ very first appeared in an official Rebaudioside A site publication by marine biologist Robert Chapman (2001). h For far more on the metagenomic and organism-centred approaches, see Van der Hout (2013). i Because of technological advances (especially the introduction of next-generation sequencing methodology), the single-organism strategy has recen.