Today, new technologies are being discovered and researched everywhere. While it may have been out of the spotlight for a while, synthetic biology (synbio) is arguably one of the most controversial. While it is currently limited to the altering the genetic material of pre-existing cells, it raises a question that will become more important as this field progresses- is creating artificial life ethical? With several factors and unknowns at this time, it’s not an easy question to answer. According to the article Realizing the Potential of Synthetic Biology by George M. Church, synthetic biology has a large potential to grow, as “we still have little understanding of how circuit designs can function effectively in cells and tissues” (Church). This means that the ethicality for synthetic biology is mostly based on predictions for the future. However, the ethicality of synthetic biology can be determined by applying the principles of laws for bioethics and emerging technologies to these factors. Social implications are the most important factor when it comes to considering how ethical a technology is. As of 2010, the Presidential Commision for the Study of Bioethical Issues developed a set of basic principles to assess emerging technologies based on some of their social …show more content…
The main idea of democratic deliberation is that decision making is collaborative and embraces friendly debate and participation by the public. While decision must be made by laws or agreements, they “need not (and often should not) be permanently binding, particularly when subsequent developments warrant additional examination” (Gutmann). While the ethicality of synthetic biology is an ongoing issue, with several rules to keep it under control, these rules are flexible, and under the agreement that they may be changed as more research arises. Thus, synthetic biology follows this
Web. 3 May 2014. “What Is Genetic Engineering?” Union of Concerned Scientists. N.p., 18 July 2003.
Disputes over human genetic engineering concern the means for achieving assumed ends, rather than being a healthy discussion about the ends themselves. This book not only explores how decisions about the ethics of human genetic engineering are made, but also shows how the structure of the debate has led to the technological choices we now face. It is the ultimate question we will face. We have already create many things we want, and we even can rebuilt organs for the wounded. It is not even a problem of science and technology——which we can easily do nowadays.
Threshold 5 tackles the beginning of life on Earth. This is where any living things are characterized by metabolism, homeostasis, and reproduction. Over time, the genetic makeup of any living thing change so later generations being slightly different. This results into diversification and the evolution of certain species that best suit their environment. However, threshold 5 also deals with the idea of dealing with the “natural world.” It may seem that the environment is almost entirely man-made but the “natural world” is still a huge part of the environment. This can be simple as the earth on the ground, the air that people breathe in, or even the sun that provides the heat and light to the planet. However, as human technology progresses the “natural world” becomes less and less apparent in the world today.
"When they are finally attempted…genetic manipulations will…be done to change a death sentence into a life verdict." In agreeing with this quote by James D. Watson, director of the Human Genome Project, I affirm today’s resolution, "Human genetic engineering is morally justified." I will now present a few definitions. Human genetic engineering is the altering, removal, or addition of genes through genetic processes. Moral is "pertaining to right conduct; ethical." Justified is to be "proper; well-deserved." Therefore, something that is morally justified is ethically beneficial. My value today will be cost-benefit justice. When we examine the benefits that human genetic engineering provides to society, these benefits will outweigh any costs and will thus affirming the resolution will provide for justice. I will now present one observation—the existence of human genetic engineering will not be without limits. Patrick Ferreira, the director of medical genetics at the University of Alabama Hospitals, notes that a "technological imperative [states] that the development of extraordinary powers does not automatically authorize their use." In other words, the point of technology is to be careful, and as with any technology, a society will be meticulous in its understanding of human genetic engineering. I will now present 3 contentions that uphold my value of cost benefit justice.
Richard Williams proposed that the issue of human freedom be re-conceptualized. Rejecting the traditional view of self-direction as the possibility of choosing among alternatives, Williams suggested that we ground our understanding of individual freedom in morality. In this view, human freedom is enhanced as one "lives truthfully." Truthful living runs counter to self-deception and thereby opens the way for greater freedom, which is fundamentally concerned with being, or existing. It is also concerned with doing or choosing, but only as such individual actions harmonize with an already existing schema of existence When the act of choosing results in self-deception, one cannot automatically assume that choice has been exercised. If deception occurs, one has merely used the freedom to choose to step out of the arena in which it exists. The Aristotelian ethics concurs with the basic tenets of Williams' philosophy.
Genetic Engineering has recently become a contentious topic within medical and social circles. Controversial topics such as Sex Selection and Designer Babies are linked to Genetic engineering. They are destructive in every circumstance. Genetic Engineering is detrimental towards the individual and all posterity.
Genetic engineering gives the power to change many aspects of nature and could result in a lot of life-saving and preventative treatments. Today, scientists have a greater understanding of genetics and its role in living organisms. However, if this power is misused, the damage could be very great. Therefore, although genetic engineering is a field that should be explored, it needs to be strictly regulated and tested before being put into widespread use. Genetic engineering has also, opened the door way to biological solutions for world problems, as well as aid for body malfunctions. I think that scientists should indeed stop making genetic engineering for humans, because it will soon prove to be devastating to the human race. It would cause rivalries and tension among different kinds of genetically engineered humans for dominance and power.
Human Genetic Engineering: Designing the Future As the rate of advancements in technology and science continue to grow, ideas that were once viewed as science fiction are now becoming reality. As we collectively advance as a society, ethical dilemmas arise pertaining to scientific advancement, specifically concerning the controversial topic of genetic engineering in humans.
Before we begin to delve into the ethical depths of biotechnology and genetic engineering, we must first understand how this technology works. To do this let’s start by discussing cells. All organisms are made up of microscopic entities called cells. The human body consists of about ten trillion cells of about two hundred different types, such as skin cells, blood cells, and muscle cells. To gain a general understanding of how cells work, we will look at some of the simplest cells possible- bacteria cells. Once we have an understanding of how bacteria work, it is not hard to see how cells function in other organisms.
The changes it could bring are amazing, there is really no reason to stop learning more about helping to heal the human body. Works Cited Work Citations The "Genetic Engineering" 123HelpMe.com. 08 May 2017 http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=67046>. King James Version. Arizona:
In an article titled “The Ethical Implications of Gene Therapy” the group of advisers on Ethical Implications of Biotechnology of the European commission states issues and rules that should be abided by, along with beliefs on the direction of biotechnology. At its present stage, biotechnology focuses on serious diseases which are incurable at the moment, however through this research treatment for these diseases could be found. The group of advisers feel that there should be levels at which research should focus on, instead of jumping into it all at once. Basic research should be carried out prior to clinical trials, and then move on to biotechnology. This can be done by supporting research actions, organizing training and exchange programs or any other appropriate means. Gene therapy protocols require that ethical evaluation consists of processes assuring quality, transparency and efficiency without delays of treatment to the patients who need it. This is crucial because an inefficient, poor quality treatment could cost someone their life. The group also feels that gene therapy research should be restricted to serious diseases for which there is not a current treatment. Expanding research to other things could be done if a medical evaluation calls for it. Equal access should be assured to all researchers within the European Union, thus sharing information and helping to improve orphan drugs. This could also save time and money. In order to insure the public of what is going on, conclusions of evaluations should regularly be published to encourage public debate. The public is not usually informed much about genetic therapy and many people have the wrong idea about it. Should reports be published more often, there will be less public confusion and ridicule.
...follows the general code of ethics, but it only has one specific code of ethics for gene synthesis. This worries many people because they cannot see synthetic biologists’ ethical procedures and how these researchers would apply these rules in different situations. In time, there will be an agreed upon code of ethics for synthetic biology and this will help relieve people because they will believe that valuable, but possibly dangerous, information is less likely fall into the wrong hands and that appropriate experimenting occurs. The goal of synthetic biology is to improve medicine and protect the environment. Synthetic biologists want to cure cancer, provide new energy sources, and more sustainable foods. People’s concerns are legitimate and need to be analyzed, but until these ethical concerns and possible risks are addressed synthetic biology cannot move forward.
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.
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.
Genetic engineering seems decades away, but through modern technology, it has recently entered the human realm. Some believe genetic engineering will bring forth great advancements in the human brain and body, but instead some believe one mistake creates a world where every child will be genetically engineered just to keep up with the rest of society. Many times, the media plays a very strong role in the image of this issue, and masks the true identity of this social injustice. However, what forms of genetic engineering can be done in humans today? What is in store for the future? What are the risks and what could be the possible benefits? Currently gene therapy is one of the only ways to change the genetic makeup of an animal or human. Also,