From reading Fukuyama’s Our Posthuman Future I gathered that if the human mind and body are shaped by tons of genes, as the decoding of the human genome seems to highlight, then biotechnologist will be able to change both one day in searching to perfect the flawed human clay, will modify human nature. Fukuyama asserts his thoughts about what in fact is at stake with biotechnology in which he states, “Is…the very grounding of the human moral sense”. Throughout the reading it became clear that Fukuyama’s purpose was not to delineate the consequences of biotechnology, but to argue that biotechnology threatens both the very distinction of a human being and the existing social fabric. He also asserts that government institutions should be established to evaluate and regulate biotechnological innovations. Throughout his book he investigates ways in which biotechnology may change the human essence with no intention to experience repeat of history and the hopes to stray far away from a post human future. It seems that Fukuyama fears that biotechnology will make monsters of us all to say the least being that human values are rooted in human nature and human nature is rooted in our biological being, which is particularly in our genes. Tampering with human biology could alter human nature, convert our principles and last but not least undermine capitalism.
The introductory chapter in Part I outlines the book's thesis and uses Huxley's Brave New World as an analogy for the subtle modifications of human nature and society likely to result from biotechnology. Such adjustments will possibly face limited antagonism because "everyone gets what they want". With Fukuyama's move into this territory, it may be that bioethicists are going to be upstag...
... middle of paper ...
...odify human nature. The final chapter of Part I reviews concerns which include genetic engineering’s promise of a "kinder gentler eugenics" and an increase in the number of discarded embryos as a means of removing malfunctioning genes and increasing reproductive choice elevated by such technological intercessions. Fukuyama briefly discusses religious, utilitarian, and philosophical objections to biotechnology. He acknowledges that religious grounds for assessing biotechnology are clearest and therefore argues for their greater acceptance in diverse democracies. He points out that utilitarian methods highlight measurable factors over imperceptible effects on human rights and morality. Philosophically speaking, Fukuyama believes that human rights are beached in human nature as the foundation for the human ethical sense, philosophical argument as well as social skills.
In the novel Fahrenheit 451 by author Ray Bradbury we are taken into a place of the future where books have become outlawed, technology is at its prime, life is fast, and human interaction is scarce. The novel is seen through the eyes of middle aged man Guy Montag. A firefighter, Ray Bradbury portrays the common firefighter as a personal who creates the fire rather than extinguishing them in order to accomplish the complete annihilation of books. Throughout the book we get to understand that Montag is a fire hungry man that takes pleasure in the destruction of books. It’s not until interacting with three individuals that open Montag’s eyes helping him realize the errors of his ways. Leading Montag to change his opinion about books, and more over to a new direction in life with a mission to preserve and bring back the life once sought out in books. These three individual characters Clarisse McClellan, Faber, and Granger transformed Montag through the methods of questioning, revealing, and teaching.
In his piece, “Human Dignity”, Francis Fukuyama explores the perception of human dignity in today's society. This perception is defined by what Fukuyama calls “Factor X”. This piece draws attention to how human dignity has been affected recently and its decline as we go into the future. Using the input given by the Dalai Lama in his piece, “Ethics and New Genetics”, the implementing of factor X and human dignity on future generations will be explored. Through the use of the pieces, “Human Dignity and Human Reproductive Cloning by Steven Malby, Genetic Testing and Its Implications: Human Genetics Researchers Grapple with Ethical Issues by Isaac Rabino, and Gender Differences in the Perception of Genetic Engineering Applied to Human Reproduction by Carol L. Napolitano and Oladele A. Ogunseitan, the decline on the amount of human dignity found in today's society as well as the regression in Factor X that can be found today compared to times past. Society's twist on ethics as a result of pop culture and an increase in genetic engineering has caused for the decline in the amount of dignity shown by the members of society and the regression of Factor X to take hold in today's society.
Monsters under the bed, drowning, and property damage are topics many people have nightmares about; nightmares about a dystopian future, on the other hand, are less common. Despite this, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 and George Orwell’s 1984 display a nightmarish vision about a dystopian society in the near future. Fahrenheit 451 tells of Guy Montag’s experience in a society where books have become illegal and the population has become addicted to television. Meanwhile, 1984 deals with Winston Smith’s affairs in Oceania, a state controlled by the totalitarian regime known as the Party. This regime is supposedly headed by a man named Big Brother. By examining the dehumanized settings, as well as the themes of individuality and manipulation, it becomes clear that novels successfully warn of a nightmarish future.
In Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, irony is used to convey information and it contributes to the overall theme of the novel. Written during the era of McCarthyism, Fahrenheit 451 is about a society where books are illegal. This society believes that being intellectual is bad and that a lot of things that are easily accessible today should be censored. The overall message of the book is that censorship is not beneficial to society, and that it could cause great harm to one’s intelligence and social abilities. An analysis of irony in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury shows that this literary technique is effective in contributing to the overall theme of the novel because it gives more than one perspective on how censorship can negatively affect a society.
In Aldous Huxley's novel, "Brave New World" he introduces a character named, Bernard Marx an alpha part of the upper higher class who does not quite fit in. Bernard is cursed by the surrounding rumors of something going wrong during his conditioning that he becomes bitter and isolates himself from those around him in the World State. Huxley's character experiences both alienation and enrichment to being exiled from a society that heavily relies on technology and forms of entertainment with little to no morals.
There were quite a few changes made from Aldous Huxley’s, Brave New World to turn it into a “made for TV” movie. The first major change most people noticed was Bernard Marx’s attitude. In the book he was very shy and timid toward the opposite sex, he was also very cynical about their utopian lifestyle. In the movie Bernard was a regular Casanova. He had no shyness towards anyone. A second major deviation the movie made form the book was when Bernard exposed the existing director of Hatcheries and Conditioning, Bernard himself was moved up to this position. In the book the author doesn’t even mention who takes over the position. The biggest change between the two was Lenina, Bernard’s girlfriend becomes pregnant and has the baby. The screenwriters must have made this up because the author doesn’t even mention it. The differences between the book and the movie both helped it and hurt it.
In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley deftly creates a society that is indeed quite stable. Although they are being mentally manipulated, the members of this world are content with their lives, and the presence of serious conflict is minimal, if not nonexistent. For the most part, the members of this society have complete respect and trust in their superiors, and those who don’t are dealt with in a peaceful manner as to keep both society and the heretic happy. Maintained by cultural values, mental conditioning, and segregation, the idea of social stability as demonstrated in Brave New World is, in my opinion, both insightful and intriguing.
Savulescu, Julian. “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Human Beings.” Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. Ed. David Kaplan. 2nd ed. Lanham: Roman & Littlefield, 2009. 417-430.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World portrays a society in which science has clearly taken over. This was an idea of what the future could hold for humankind. Is it true that Huxley’s prediction may be correct? Although there are many examples of Huxley’s theories in our society, there is reason to believe that his predictions will not hold true for the future of society.
...ciety. Society would be opening a Pandora’s Box by unleashing genetic enhancement. Francis Fukuyama (2004), a professor of international political economy at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, urges society to consider humility when regarding genetic enhancement, “If we do not develop it (humility) soon, we may unwittingly invite the Transhumanists (GE) to deface humanity with their genetic bulldozers and psychotropic shopping malls (p. 2). How we respond to the upcoming events and policies regarding genetic enhancement in the future will forever change our lives. If we do not act accordingly society as we know it could be devalued to what Francis Fukuyama suggested. Genetic enhancement will lead to no bio-diversity and bring an end to our long and prosperous evolutionary phases. Would you want to leave this turmoil for future generations?
The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have tremendously improved the average human lifespan and the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to make humans superior by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This ability raises the question of how ought this new technology be used, if at all? The idea of human enhancement is a very general, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am specifically referring to the use of genetic intervention prior to birth. Julian Savulescu in his, “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings” argues that it is not only permissible to intervene genetically, but is morally obligatory. In this paper I will argue that it is not morally obligatory to genetically intervene, but may be permissible under the criterion established by Savulescu. I plan to argue that the argument used by Savulescu for the obligation to genetically intervene is not the same obligation as the prevention and treatment of disease. The ability for humans to genetically intervene is not sufficient to provide a moral obligation.
Coker, Jeffrey Scott. "Genetic Engineering Is Natural and Should Be Pursued." Genetic Engineering, edited by Noël Merino, Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context,
The main ethical dilemma presented in the film is the use of genetic modification technology in humans. The scientists initially approach this dilemma by thinking like classic teleologians. “By incorporating human DNA into the hybrid template, we can begin to address any number of genetically influenced diseases…Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, even some forms of cancer”. (Splice, 2009) They are producing a greater good by choosing this ethical path. This is the core motive for the current use of GMOs. According to the Human Genome Project (U.S. Department of Energy Genome Programs, 2008), GMOs have a variety of applications; To increase the yield of crops and animal products, to make plants and animals more resistant to certain disease, and more efficiently processed are but a few. The end product of these applications is, in theory, to benefit humanity. If we are already genetically modifying plants and animals, is a...
The field of biotechnology is absolutely huge. There is the medical area and agriculture area of development. The agriculture area concentrates on developing hybrid crops and manipulating genes so that the plants natural defenses activate. Although this is interesting and has an effect on our lives, I have chosen to concentrate on the medical aspect of biotechnology. I have also decided not to comment on the ethics of the new developments, since I believe that the reader should decide for oneself. More specifically, the concentration will be on the Human Genome Project, artificial organs, and companies that are involved in the biotech industry.
Biotechnology is a process that involves a controlled or deliberate manipulation of biological systems or life forms. With the aid of scientists, biotechnology has been used to produce genetically modified foods. The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. (Whitman).The modification of the genetic structure of food is an old concept, one practiced by farmers for thousands of years. By cross breeding different types of crops; mainly crops with good traits, they were able to come up with new organisms that possess desired traits. The problem with that process is that cross-breeding is slow and unpredictable. Today, thanks to progress in biotechnology, scientists are able take a gene from one living organism and put it directly into another plant or animal. This resulted in more precise changes in a shorter period of time. Scientists claim that this new methods created crops that taste better (more nutritious), yield more, repel pests and grow in more difficult conditions. The outcome of this led to cheaper crops that feed billions of people all over the world. This progressive method has revolutionized the way we produce food to feed our growing population. In this paper, I will be defending the motion that biotechnology is ethical. In order to do this, the meaning of ethics must be clarified. Ethics is one branch of philosophy that asks questions about the best human life and how to live 'the good life.' Through ethics, we examine the ch...