Genetic engineering is an extreme breakthrough in science and in the future of life in general. The controversy surrounding this issue, though, makes genetic engineering one of the most debatable topics we will inevitably have to face someday. The advantages to this type of science are plentiful in some people’s eyes while others see it as an uncanny manipulation of nature. This breakthrough, along with genetic discoveries still uncovered, has the potential to ultimately alter the future, but will that be for the best or worst of mankind? Although genetic engineering can eradicate both physical and mental deficiencies limiting certain humans, it should not become an alternate way in which people can begin to design babies to their liking and standards.
When it comes to eliminating diseases in people, plants, and animals, genetic engineering has an advantageous nature. It can pin-point the people prone to hereditary diseases but also can begin to eliminate infectious diseases by implanting genes with antiviral proteins. Yet, what occurs to the subject if there is an error while implanting and will we still want to keep a child that has endured such an error? With plants, and perhaps some animals, genetic engineering has much more beneficial aspects than it does with humans. Plants can be ‘tailor made’ to absorb more CO2 in order to reduce the threat of global warming. In the animal kingdom, we may be able to grow human body parts that someone may be in need of, on to the animal. Yet, this could open doors to animal cruelty.
Though, there are the before-mentioned advantages to this specific science, there are many disadvantages and inevitable outcomes, especially when dealing with humans. Since nature is an inter-related chain, where many species are linked in the food chain, some scientists are said to believe that introducing genetically modified genes can have irreparable effects with unknown consequences. On another scale, genetic engineering is one huge moral battle, specifically conflicting with religious questioning of whether or not man has the right to manipulate the laws of nature. When it comes to the new idea of ‘designer babies’, one has to question the nature of the people creating the baby. If we are all allowed to make babies according to our likings, what is going to stop a mentally ill person from creating the next Hitler? Also, this proposes a handful amount of inevitable problems for that child. If a child is specifically created out of the wrong reasons, they may face an enormous amount of pressure. For example, maybe the parents are not financially well off so they decide to make a baby that will grow up to be a rich rock-star. Now that baby all through his life is conditioned to carry his family through their trials and errors; is that really fair for a child to face? Another inevitable conflict genetic engineering introduces is the total exploitation of nature and free-will and individuality. No one will be an individual anymore because they will just be a prototype of what their mother and father created. They ultimately can end up with no thought processes of their own, just the thought processes put into them by their parents. This could possibly lead to a conformist society or ultimately a dystopia.
One aspect of genetic engineering mentioned in the first paragraph is what if an error occurs during creation? What will happen to the baby? Will it suffer from mutilations or further retardation? If this does happen, what future will that baby face? In a world of competition for the best baby, will those parents really want a ‘defective’ child? Another question that must be asked is how expensive is this whole new science going to be on the world and who exactly pays for it? In a world where we are all ready overwhelmed with unwanted children, those children will be pushed even further into oblivion if people have access to designing their own children. Also what happens to natural childbirth: is it condemned because society becomes fearful of ‘natural’ children or will it become another option for people that may not be able to afford designing their own children? One last issue that certainly may arise is a population crisis. With access to creating such ‘perfect human beings’, what limitations will be placed on people creating babies? What stops a person from designing a baby just for the sheer fun of it?
Genetic engineering is a science that opens many conflicting doors. Religion, morals, nature, and the future of our world are all at stake when discussing the possibilities of this new world science. Although it can be beneficial in a few aspects, genetic engineering should never become the dominate way in which people have the ability to manipulate their own children. This science has the power to eliminate such natural miracles as childbirth if we give it the credit to do so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You write: "For example, maybe the parents are not financially well off so they decide to make a baby that will grow up to be a rich rock-star." Is there any guarantee that the child will be rich? How does altering genetics guarantee wealth? Are all talented individuals who play rock music rich? Will there be any guarantee that people will be interested in rock music?
You write: "Religion, morals, nature, and the future of our world are all at stake when discussing the possibilities of this new world science." Yes, all of this is at stake. No one writes about how the genetically engineered embryo will become a child. In fact a number of the blogs talk about altering the child. To me that means one already born and older than a baby.
You write that science has "the power to eliminate such natural miracles as childbirth if we give it the credit to do so." Not sure what you mean by giving it "the credit to do so," but do wonder how children will be birthed if not in the usual manner. Are you and others in class suggesting that an incubator will be used?
All of you are posing some interesting questions, perhaps, without realizing that you are. Entire industries may be born as a result of genetic engineering. I ask you as I have asked others, how does this fit into the chaos theory, or does it?
How will we address the issues of population control? Is Isaac Asimov correct when he suggests that society will starve to death?
I agree with all of the points that you make about the complications that arise with genetic engineering. You did a good job making me think more about the long term consequences rather than just the immediate effects. The concept of a person intentionally creating "the next Hitler" was also another point that really struck me, because I hadn't considered the potential of someone using engineering to generate an "evil" person. I was only thinking about people being engineered to be "better" but every has a different definition of this so it's frightening what some people's "better" may turn out to be. This opens up a whole new door.
The one question that I'm wondering...Do you think we should completely outrule GE or just keep it very controlled? You ended by saying that it "should never be the dominant way in which people have the ability to manipulate their own children," and you had also mentioned several benefits, so I was just curious.
Post a Comment