Solomon Harris
ERH 102-01
Biotechnology Essay 3
Help Received: None
Reflective Tag
For this essay, I came up with writing about genetic enhancement, discussing how it could be used for humans to reach perfection, a word quite difficult to define in this sense. I thought of all the possible areas I could talk about relating to this pursuit of perfection from it being a part of human nature, to humans having a God-complex, to sports and a few other areas. With these ideas in mind, I made an argument about the about human’s pursuit of perfection, specifically whether its a worthwhile goal, and the benefits and consequences it could bring.
Human Perfection: What’s Wrong with Being Average?
Everyone has certain physical insecurities about themselves, some more severe than others, but there is at least one thing that most people would like to change about themselves if they had the chance. For me, it was my teeth. From the time I was in elementary school all the way up until 8th grade, I had a gap in my teeth, which also caused some of my teeth to be crooked. I wasn’t that pressed about it, considering that I wasn’t that concerned about my appearance at the time, but my mom and I one day decided to get braces to straighten my teeth and close the gap, which now that I think about was more of her decision. This conventional method of closing teeth didn’t need anything too fancy only requiring some metal and glue, however there were still some downsides, First, I just didn’t like the way I looked with them, already having glasses at the time too, but additionally it they needed extra work to take care of, prevent me from eating certain foods, and were pretty expensive too. What if all that could have been eliminated, or something utilized to just prevent me from developing the crooked teeth in the first place. Well there is. Biotechnology and its ever growing capabilities have allowed for genetic alteration to be possible; meaning that if I were still a developing fetus I could be given a gene to give me straight teeth, or any other feature that I would want. It sounds cool, but it does raise some concern about future possibilities and/or ramifications. The use of this type of technology for these purposes and other purposes discussed later in the essay give the idea that humans may have an obsession with perfection. Humans have a natural tendency of wanting to be better, whether it is physical appearance or physical capability, however, it is a matter of the extent and the manner in which we are changing ourselves that is up for debate. The pursuit of perfection and unnecessary desires that humans create for themselves blinds them from the real problems at hand among both the world and within themselves.
One area where this desire for perfection is becoming more and more present is in parenthood. Before even becoming parents, while as couples or sometimes even before marriage people have ideas of how many kids they would like to have, what they would want them to look like, and what features they would like them to have. With NRT(new reproductive technology), parents can have more control over their children’s appearance, genetically altering them before they fully develop in the womb (Parke et al. 111). These genetic alterations will ultimately make parents capable of designing their own children with specific features and traits. In “The Pursuit of Perfection”, Parke et al. asks the question: “Is the pursuit of perfectibility the route to a better, more just society?”, a question that is impossible to answer right now but highly debatable (Parke et al. 112). Yes, perfecting human weaknesses and imperfections would probably see some benefits to society, in which humans are able to live longer, become immune to disease and perform better physically, but at what cost. This cost, a mostly unknown risk, outweighs the good that this biotechnology-developed capability could produce, therefore making the seemingly easily answered question much more difficult to respond to. Additionally, the idea of perfectibility making a society more just, raises even more controversy. With all the inequalities there are in today’s world, and varying access to even the most basic technology such as automobiles, laptops and smartphones, who’s to say that newly developed technology will be readily available both in location and cost for everyone to use. If not, the idea of society becoming more just is implausible, and out of the question.
After asking their initial question, Parke et al. goes on to list several recurring instances in our society that show the human pursuit of perfection, considering it to be more of a cultural dilemma, something that has shown to be prevalent throughout human history. The article notes sports as one area in our society that faces this dilemma, because of its long history of athletes using performance enhancing drugs to make themselves better than their competition. The other area mentioned is the cosmetic industry, which involves “surgery, drugs or creams” to improve people’s physical appearance(Parke et al. 113). These two areas have shown the most common uses of the current genetically/biologically enhancing technology that is available recent times. In sports performance is prized, because superior performance ultimately leads to a win. In the cosmetic industry, appearance is of the greatest value, with women and now even men trying to alter their appearance to their idea, or their perception of society’s idea, of perfection. Later in their article, referencing “The Case Against Perfection” by Michael Sandel, Parke et al. note that “Sandel examined the problems with genetic engineering for humans and argued that the key problem is one of hubris, the arrogance of thinking one can control creation, as well as the intolerance of diversity that the pursuit of what is assumed to be perfection implies.” (Parke et al. 113). The ideas of hubris and humans controlling their creation for themselves, introduces another idea of humans having a God-complex. This God-complex is shown by the human desire to obtain powers that God or a god, depending on an individual’s belief, possesses. In this case creating and designing life are those powers. The urge to want to be like God, shows the strong arrogance humans have in our own abilities, as well as our lack of content with being human. Our constant desire to take control of natural processes and use and abuse them for our own benefit, a common recurrence in our history, is yet again illustrated by this desire.
In “The Case for Perfection”, the author, W. Miller Brown, talks about why he believes humans should strive for perfection, a seemingly direct response to Micahel Sandel’s “The Case Against Perfection”. Although not advocating for human perfection per se, and in complete opposition to Sandel’s beliefs, Brown states that biological enhancements should be used as much as possible to advance humans and society as a whole, beyond merely curing diseases and disabilities (Brown 128). Brown begins his article by discussing the issue of performance enhancing drugs in sports. Brown uses this area as one of the main points of discussion. Brown notes these drugs as being methods of providing advantages to the user that can be used against the competition, according to the laws that prohibit them, but he asks the question: “should drugs be prohibited in the first place?”(Brown 128). He responds by stating that “If their use were permissible, there would be no cheating”(Brown, 128). The logic that Brown uses makes sense, however, the drugs also pose health hazards and become an unfair advantage for non-drug using athletes. From a philosophical standpoint, Brown says that others believe that the use of drugs is what would be seen as the reason for success, not the foundational elements of sports that most athletes display, such as working hard, putting in effort, and persevering, an idea that he disagrees with (Brown, 128). Taking away these central components of sports, is one reason why drugs are prohibited, being unfair to everyone not using the drugs and actually putting in the hard work. In response to the idea of drugs making competitive sports unfair, Brown brings up the idea that “nature is morally neutral” because of its varying distribution of certain genetic traits and characteristics; an idea that many people who are against using drugs support. With this idea, advantages in competing are given to those who are naturally, or biologically advantageous (Brown, 128). Therefore, according to Brown, the unfair nature of nature itself defies the idea of sports being fair and equal in the first place, which calls to question whether the argument of the performance enhancing drugs causing unfair advantages is even a valid argument to make. Because of the “natural lottery” that exists among humans in the womb, Brown suggests that new biological technologies have been looked towards ways of evening out the unfair odds that nature creates (Brown 128). He then goes on to respond to a few more arguments against his stance on genetic enhancement. The first being the idea that using biotechnology for purposes such as growing taller, shows that the only applications of the technology would be just to get a slight advantage over others. However, Brown refutes this with the idea that people can also use the technology to fix areas where they may be genetically deficient. The second argument against Brown’s belief revolves around the accessibility of the technology that will make such genetic feats possible. As technology continues to advance it is very likely that only the rich will have access to it, whether that is a few select wealthy people in a society or a wealthy society as a whole. Brown argues that “there are significant differences among human beings in physical and cognitive abilities”, therefore creating more differences through the use of biotechnology shouldn’t be a problem (Brown, 131). He believes that the new inequalities created from the use of biotechnology shouldn’t be frowned upon, instead embraced and looked at as a way to benefit society. The final argument discusses the possible harms using these technologies could bring physically through different procedures. Brown argues health risks such as serious injuries from sports pose more of a threat than performance enhancement drugs, which are used to protect the user and in some cases prevent those injuries. Despite refuting all the claims and arguments against him, Brown eventually comes to a conclusion that there cannot be a case for or against the use of biotechnology to reach perfection, just because of the numerous possibilities that await humans in the future. Brown justifies his beliefs to a point, because, yes, there is the possibility that people would use the technology to fix disabilities and deficiencies, there will also be some who abuse it and use it as a way to gain some personal befenti that would likely give them power over others. He touches on the good that can come from the use of such technology, but not so much the bad, which are the possible harms that can present themselves through an increase in use and importance to society. Although the harms may not be physical as Brownsays, they may affect other aspects of our society in ways we cannot yet fathom. His argument against the technology producing more inequalities, was not developed that well. In spite of inequalities already being present in society, that doesn’t justify producing more inequalities, especially with something of this scale. Solving current problems and inequalities should be top priority over utilizing new technological methods that would create more inequalities.
In “Biotech Enhancement and the History of Redemption”, Gilbert Meilaender, the author discusses areas in society where humans strive to “achieve superior performance”, pondering what really makes people uneasy about human enhancement (Meilaender 46). Meilander uses “Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness” and “The Case Against Perfection to make his argument. Meilaender suggests the lack of fairness present among the non-users of the gene-altering technology, pressure to be able to do the same feats as others, and a sense of a loss in work ethic, are reasons why performance enhancing drugs are problematic (Meilaender 49). These are three common themes present in the previous two articles as well. Meilander then notes that in “Beyond Therapy”, it discusses four human desires that biological enhancement may become useful to achieve: ”producing better children, ageless bodies, happy souls, and superior performance” (Meilaender 50). These four desires have been sought after throughout human history, and are now closer than ever to being fulfilled.
Meilaender concludes by saying there are certain aspects that define humans that should just not be altered, and that humans should reach a point of contentment (Meilaender 55). The idea of contentment is something that society nowadays both rejects and embraces often depending on certain circumstances. Humans have shown to either be content when advancement seems too difficult, however, they ignore the contentment when they see something that can make their lives better or easier, although not entirely necessary. Neither action is that bad in its simplest forms, however, humans tend to take them to extremes either becoming lazy or afraid to move out of contentment or too arrogant and greedy to become content with what is already in possession. It is the balance between the two that humans are missing today that would make us much more prosperous as a society if we found.
Taking into account all of these sources there are too many factors that have and even some that haven’t already been considered that show that the pursuit of perfection is a never-ending goal that humans will always continue to strive towards. Although not wise, humans will continue on this journey anyways, because it is just a part of their nature. The practice of contentment, for example, would allow for athletes to feel comfortable performing with just the talent and skill they developed themselves or people feeling unashamed of their appearance to the point that they don’t desire any type of bodily modifications. Contentment is something that is definitely more attainable than perfection. It would take less work to achieve and would allow humans to take their attention and desire to solve problems where it may actually be more useful to society. The problems of inequality in the world today and the intolerance humans have for being content with having or being a little less, will always be ignored by humans pursuit of perfection, which will one day, ultimately lead to unforeseen consequences if not stopped.
Works Cited:
Miller, W. Brown. “The Case of Perfection”. Human Kinetics. No. 36, 2009, pp.127-139 http://web.a.ebscohost.com.vmiezproxy.vmi.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=21741c20-ffd0-4cf5-bd69-d0494c8b7694%40sdc-v-sessmgr02
Meilaender, Gilbert. “Biotech Enhancement and the History of Redemption”. The New Atlantis. 2015, pp. 44-59
Parke, R., Gailey, C., Coltrane, S., and DiMatteo, M. “The Pursuit of Perfection”. Thamyris/Intersecting No. 25. 2012, pp. 111-126
Leave a Reply