Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on bioethics
Reflection of bioethics
Reflection of bioethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Michael Sandel is a distinguished political philosopher and a professor at Harvard University. Sandel is best known for his best known for his critique of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. While he is an acclaimed professor if government, he has also delved deeply into the ethics of biotechnology. At Harvard, Sandel has taught a course called "Ethics, Biotechnology, and the Future of Human Nature" and from 2002 to 2005 he served on the President’s Council on Bioethics (Harvard University Department of Government, 2013). In 2007, Sandel published his book, The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering, in which he explains unethical implications biotechnology has and may have in the near future regarding genetic engineering.
The ethics behind genetic engineering have been discussed and argued for years now. Some arguing points often include competitive advantages, playing God, and the polarization of society, but Sandel takes a different approach in explaining society’s “unease” with the morality of genetic engineering. Broadcasted through several examples throughout the book, Sandel explains that genetic engineering is immoral because it takes away what makes us human and makes us something else. He states that by taking control of our genetic makeup, or the makeup of our progeny, we lose our human dignity and humility. Our hunger for control will lead to the loss of appreciation for natural gifts, whether they are certain talents, inherited from the genetic lottery, or the gift of life itself.
Sandel explores the immoral nature of genetic enhancements through their potential use in athletics, creating “Bionic Athletes.” The world admires athletes for their expression of great skill in their resp...
... middle of paper ...
...In doing so, society will fail to appreciate the wonders that nature provides. While the basis of Sandel’s case is hypothetical and dependent on future innovations, he provides interesting ethical insight that may not normally be contemplated when questions of genetic engineering are at hand.
Works Cited
Harvard University Department of Government. (2013). Michael Sandel. Retrieved December 9, 2013, from http://www.gov.harvard.edu/people/faculty/michael-sandel.
Nihira, M. (2012). Amniocentesis Test. WebMD. Retrieved December 8, 2013, from http://www.webmd.com/baby/guide/amniocentesis.
Philosophical Films. (1997). Gattaca. Retrieved December 9, 2013, from http://www.philfilms.utm.edu/1/gattaca.htm.
Sandel, M. J. (2007). The case against perfection: ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
While the slogan “The pursuit of perfection” might be an effective way to market luxury automobiles, it is not a way to live one’s life. In Anna Quindlen 's speech, “Being Perfect,” she discusses the price of perfection, not in dollars or cents, but in its impact on one 's life. Through powerful anecdotes, symbols, and analogies, she creates a strong connection with her audience and utilizes it to convince them that there is a very high price of pursuing perfection- the loss of oneself.
Butryn believes, the challenge that is issued is whether an athlete 's ability has a dramatic change in his performance due to technology. I believe that technology should not give an athlete more ability than a regular athlete because at that point it becomes unfair to both competitors. Trivino states, “The sports practiced by athletes who have had organs or mechanical parts implanted and their desire to take part in regular athletic competitions puts sports authorities in an ethical and legal tight spot” (118). Trivino believes Authorities are put into an ethical and legal tight spot because there must be a line drawn. A line that clearly states what is and isn 't allowed to be able to take part in regular athletic competitions. I believe it becomes unfair and too much of an advantage for the athlete to use in competition. According to Trivino, “The cyberization of sport has occupied a role in medical and sport fields in recent years due to the fact that this issue calls into question the very foundations of contemporary sport,
To choose for their children, the world’s wealthy class will soon have options such as tall, pretty, athletic, intelligent, blue eyes, and blonde hair. Occasionally referred to as similar to “the eugenics of Hitler’s Third Reich” (“Designer Babies” n.p.), the new genetics technology is causing differences in people’s opinions, despite altering DNA before implantation is “just around the corner.” (Thadani n.p.). A recent advance in genetically altering embryos coined “designer babies” produces controversy about the morality of this process.
I am quite convinced by the essay that the sports is unfairness because of the human biological diversity, but in the other way round I see many issues in levelling the playing field, the attempts of transformation and doping, which are ethical overlap in practice that they are both artificial improvement causing bad effects to human, instead of justify these bionic men why we won’t count them all as prohibited since the nature gives disparate conditions to each; or as legal actions since the purpose of surgery is hard to prove and doping is what every athlete does even the elite athlete, Mäntyranta was arrested in allegation of use of amphetamine and hormone. Naturally, there is neither justice nor equality in competition; the goal we try to reach is an artificial justice and equality we ruled.
With the progression of modern biotechnology, there is much contentious debate affecting ongoing developmental affairs. Controversy aligns itself with cautious thoughts on the appropriate amount of enhancement that can be applied before it undermines the “gifted character of human power and achievement (Sandel).” Michael Sandel, author of The Case Against Perfection argues through political discourse that the passion to master all of the science dominion through the use of such technology is largely flawed by our interpretations of perfection.
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 increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically 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 a morally obligatory. In this paper, I will argue that it is not morally obligatory to intervene genetically even if such intervention may be permissible under certain criteria. I will show, in contrast to Savulescu’s view, that the moral obligation to intervene is not the same as the moral obligation to prevent and treat disease. In short, I will show that the ability of humans to intervene genetically is not sufficient to establish a moral obligation.
...pen manner that allows us to perceive the opportunities offered by human enhancement. I disagree with Sandel’s argument that genetic enhancement for its own sake is wrong but is permissible when used in medical context. I find it hypocritical of Sandel to argue against one form of genetic manipulation while favoring another. The subject of human enhancement is too pervasive and offers too many potential benefits to restrict its use. I believe that genetic manipulation and human enhancements are inevitable. I favor an open-minded and morally grounded approach to advances in genetic engineering, only then can we deal with the moral and social ramifications that stem from the conept of human enhancement.
Perfection is much like the lottery; many people will strive for it with the hopes of attaining their ultimate goal, only to realize that reaching it is nearly impossible. However, unlike the lottery, there is not even the slightest chance of winning the final prize. To be completely perfect is an impossible feat, and the more attempts made to reach a status of “perfection”, the more let down a person will be. The quality of complete perfection is unobtainable and unreasonable, yet many cultures and certain groups of people take pride in being known as perfectionists. This reach for the impossible can be seen in the strict code followed by all knights during the feudal time period. Sir Gawain in the late
Science and technology are rapidly advancing everyday; in some ways for the better, and in some, for worse. One extremely controversial advance is genetic engineering. As this technology has high potential to do great things, I believe the power genetic engineering is growing out of control. Although society wants to see this concept used to fight disease and illness, enhance people 's lives, and make agriculture more sustainable, there needs to be a point where a line is drawn.
People should not have access to genetically altering their children because of people’s views on God and their faith, the ethics involving humans, and the possible dangers in tampering with human genes. Although it is many parent’s dream to have the perfect child, or to create a child just the way they want, parents need to realize the reality in genetic engineering. Sometimes a dream should stay a figment of one’s imagination, so reality can go in without the chance of harming an innocent child’s life.
The first point that must be made when arguing for the use of genetic engineering is stressing that genetic engineering must be highly controlled to avoid possible catastrophe. In his book, The Ethics of Genetic Control, Joseph Fletcher describes ...
In reality, many people who have not been “born” musicians or athletes have made greater accomplishments than those who were genetically endowed. In addition to that, naturally obtained genes through traditional reproduction are random, and, thus, are regarded as a gift. This randomness and the fact that even people with poor genetics can achieve success is what makes a person’s accomplishments truly authentic. Genetic modification has a potential to remove both of these factors of authenticity. In that way, Resnik and Vorhaus’s claim about authenticity of our accomplishments is not entirely
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,
Scientific and technological advances are the products of man's inherent desire to improve the society in which he lives. Such progress often accompanies an expansion of intellectual boundaries. As one acquires knowledge, one also encounters new opportunities to be explored. This is true in the area of human genome research. The implications of The Human Genome Project and other attempts to further understand the human genetic code clearly demonstrate the basic principles of social benefit versus social cost. The desired effect is obviously one in which the benefits significantly outweigh the costs. The actual impact of such technology, however, remains only an estimate until this scientific advancement becomes a reality. It is out of this inability to predict how new technology may transform society that controversy arises. For if one estimates the value of knowledge and progress to ultimately influence society in a negative manner, then, perhaps such advancement should not be attempted. The Human Genome Project and other studies involving genetic research invite debate on the most controversial and highly moral issues that characterize and define the nature of life.
Murray, Thomas H. “Sports Enhancement,” in From Birth to Death and Bench to Clinic: The Hastings Center Bioethics Briefing Book for Journalists, Policymakers, and Campaigns, ed. Mary Crowley (Garrison, NY: The Hastings Center, 2008), 153-158.