Have you ever stopped just to look at yourself in the mirror? Did you feel the desire to change a specific feature or characteristic about yourself? Or even wondered what life would be like if there were another “you”? A few short decades ago, those thoughts would have been labeled with the fiction stamp, but the deeper we continue to dive into the mysteries of life in the early stages of the 21st century, the closer those zany dreams seem to approach the dividend between science fiction and reality that has, thus far, successfully separated the two for centuries. Nowadays, a bountiful of tests and experiments are frequently being conducted in efforts to obtain praise for breaking that barrier as time proceeds. Because of the recent progress toward this goal, in which so many scientists established for themselves, nature is being altered each and every moment that life continues. Parents are now given the opportunity to conjure their own “perfect” child. People are now being allowed to “create an identical twin” for themselves. How? Through a method-Genetic Engineering- so controversial that is has branched of into many subcategories in attempts to gain positive recognition. In the eyes of Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein: or a Modern Prometheus, scientists studying genetic engineering has failed to reach their surreal goal, for she believes genetic engineering and cloning goes against natural procreation, which is the central aspect of life.
Upon harnessing the power of the atom, many scientists and researchers began to venture deeper into the discovery of genes during the conclusion of the latter stages of the 20th century. The studying of the anatomy of DNA and it component nucleotides paved the way for genetic enginee...
... middle of paper ...
...ne.org/2/13_genetic_engineering.htm>.
Oak, Manali. "Pros and Cons of Cloning." Buzzle Web Portal: Intelligent Life on the Web. Buzzle,
2011. Web. 13 Nov. 2011. .
Oak, Manali. "Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering." Buzzle Web Portal: Intelligent Life on the Web.
Buzzle, 2011. Web. 11 Nov. 2011.
engineering.html>.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Austin: Harcourt Brace &, 1997. Print.
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science. "Cloning Fact Sheet." Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Human Genome Project, 11 May 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2011.
.
Whitesides, J. G. "Bioethics." Dictionary of American History 1.3 (2003): 461-62. Print.
At first sight, there may not seem to be any similarities between the contemporary novel Never Let Me Go and the time-worn classic Frankenstein; but while Mary Shelly chooses to highlight the consequences of impetuous action in a harrowing tale about a hideous monster, Kazuo Ishiguro exemplifies the same principles in a heart wrenching tale about human clones. As a result of advancing societies, there is a common drive to create the “next best thing” whether it be monsters or clones; but the issue with this does not lie in the fact that scientists are pushing harder; but, that often there is little to no forethought regarding the consequences of creating a living thing, especially if it is created to be as human-like as possible. And, to worsen
However, with genetic engineering this miracle of like is taken and reduced to petty “character creation” picking and choosing what someone else thinks should “make them special”. An unborn child that undergoes genetic treatments in this fashion is known as a designer baby (“Should Parents Be Permitted to Select the Gender of Their Children?”). By picking and choosing the traits of a child these designer babies bear similarities to abortion, choosing to get rid of the original child in favor of a “better” one. It is also unfair to deprive a child of their own life. By removing the element of chance and imputing their own preferences, children become treated more as an extension of their parents than as living beings with their own unique life. Parents could redirect a child’s entire life by imposing their wishes before they are even born, choosing a cookie cutter tall, athletic boy over a girl with her own individual traits, or any other choice that would redirect a child’s
When the novel “Frankenstein”, by Mary Shelley came out in 1831 the general public was introduced to the idea of man creating another man, scientifically without the use of reproduction. The disasters that followed, in the novel, demonstrated the horrid fact that creating humans was not natural. That was in 1831, when the knowledge of science had not yet evolved enough to act on such an idea. Now as the start of a new millenium approaches, having the capability to scientifically produce one human who is genetically identical to another, or cloning a human, has a lot of people questioning weather or not it is our moral right to do such a thing. It is a classic debate between principles of science and principles of religion.
Farrell, Courtney. "Cloning: An Overview. By: Farrell, Courtney, Carson-Dewitt, Rosalyn, Points of View: Cloning, 2013." Ebscohost.com. Mackinvia.com, 2013. Web. 21
Over two centuries ago, Mary Shelley created a gruesome tale of the horrific ramifications that result when man over steps his bounds and manipulates nature. In her classic tale, Frankenstein, Shelley weaves together the terrifying implications of a young scientist playing God and creating life, only to be haunted for the duration of his life by the monster of his own sordid creation. Reading Shelley in the context of present technologically advanced times, her tale of monstrous creation provides a very gruesome caution. For today, it is not merely a human being the sciences are lusting blindly to bring to life, as was the deranged quest of Victor Frankenstein, but rather to generate something potentially even more dangerous and horrifying with implications that could endanger the entire world and human population.
Recent breakthroughs in the field of genetics and biotechnology have brought attention to the ethical issues surrounding human enhancement. While these breakthroughs have many positive aspects, such as the treatment and prevention of many debilitating diseases and extending human life expectancy well beyond its current limits, there are profound moral implications associated with the ability to manipulate our own nature. Michael Sandel’s “The Case Against Perfection” examines the ethical and moral issues associated with human enhancement while Nick Bostrom’s paper, “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity” compares the positions that transhumanists and bioconservatists take on the topic of human enhancement. The author’s opinions on the issue of human genetic enhancement stand in contrast to one another even though those opinions are based on very similar topics. The author’s views on human enhancement, the effect enhancement has on human nature, and the importance of dignity are the main issues discussed by Sandel and Bostrom and are the focus of this essay.
Wheale, Peter R. and Ruth M. McNally. Genetic Engineering: Catastrophe or Utopia? St. Martin's Press, NY; 1988.
Imagine a parent walking into what looks like a conference room. A sheet of paper waits on a table with numerous questions many people wish they had control over. Options such as hair color, skin color, personality traits and other physical appearances are mapped out across the page. When the questions are filled out, a baby appears as he or she was described moments before. The baby is the picture of health, and looks perfect in every way. This scenario seems only to exist in a dream, however, the option to design a child has already become a reality in the near future. Parents may approach a similar scenario every day in the future as if choosing a child’s characteristics were a normal way of life. The use of genetic engineering should not give parents the choice to design their child because of the act of humans belittling and “playing” God, the ethics involved in interfering with human lives, and the dangers of manipulating human genes.
In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley tests the motives and ethical uncertainties of the science in her time period. This is a consideration that has become more and more pertinent to our time, when we see modern scientists are venturing into what were previously unimaginable territories of science and nature, through the use of things like human cloning and genetic engineering. Through careful assessment, we can see how the novel illustrates both the potential dangers of these scientific advancements and the conflict between that and creationism.
When James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA in 1959, they could not have known that their discovery would one day lead to the possibility of a human factory that is equipped with the capabilities to mass produce perfectly designed, immortal human beings on a laboratory assembly line. Of course, this human factory is not yet possible; genetic technology is still in its infancy, and scientists are forced to spend their days unlocking the secret of human genetics in hopes of uncovering cures for diseases, alleviating suffering, and prolonging life. In the midst of their noble work, scientists still dream of a world—a utopia—inhabited by flawless individuals who have forgotten death and never known suffering. What would become of society if such a utopia existed? How will human life be altered? Leon Kass, in Life, Liberty and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics, acknowledges genetics technology’s greatness, and applauds it for its invaluable, benevolent contributions to mankind. However, Kass argues that if left to their devises and ambitions, geneticists—with the power of their technology—will steal away society’s most precious asset; genetic technology will rob society of its humanity. Genetic technology can, and will, achieve great things, but unless it is regulated and controlled, the losses will be catastrophic and the costs will far exceed the benefits.
Clapper, Rayshell. "Human Genetic Engineeing: A Very Brief Introduction." redOrbit. 9 April 2013. Web. 19 February 2014.
Sandel, M. J. The case against perfection, ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Belknap Press, 2007. Print.
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,
Wheale, Peter R., and Ruth M. McNally. Genetic Engineering: Catastrophe or Utopia? New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988.
The scientific and medical progress of DNA as been emense, from involving the identification of our genes that trigger major diseases or the creation and manufacture of drugs to treat these diseases. DNA has many significant uses to society, health and culture of today. One important area of DNA research is that used for genetic and medical research. Our abi...