What do people associate with 'genetic engineering', and what are the resources they mobilize for gaining orientation and the ability to assess this new technology? These are the central questions discussed in this paper. The theses are based on 48 'Leitfadeninterviews', made between 1995 and 1997 and complemented by a representative survey carried out in Germany in 1997, which contains 1501 cases. Most findings of the qualitative study have been verified by the survey data, the latter, however, are not presented in this paper. Though the public is not well informed about genetic engineering, strong value judgements about genetic engineering are often pronounced. Attitudes and judgements are based on subjective heuristics of risk and embedded in arguments specific to their 'Lebenswelt'. As the terms relating to hazards have a value rational or aesthetic touch, they are not quantifiable and therefore are very difficult to be incorporated into a rational discourse on risk. The public's view of genetic engineering is shaped predominantly by two fields of application: 'genfood' and human genetics including prenatal, medical and pharmaceutical applications. In most cases, a rational weighing up of benefits and risks lacks knowledge. In the main, the attitudes are not technology related-they are embedded in a wider semantic space: the doubts of an abuse of genetic engineering processes within human genetics - keywords: cloning, eugenic - play an important role in the minds of the German public, as has been experienced historically. Furthermore, fear of an untenable manipulation of consumers by gradually introduced genetically engineered food, by uncontrolled leakage of pathogens during accidents in laboratories and experiments of deliberate release or the aversion of a society's subjugation to economic and technocratic imperatives are identified as serious hazards.