If somebody makes a mistake, it could end up affecting the next few generations of humans. In conclusion and my personal opinion, genetic engineering could lead to a technically better and more advanced world despite the fact that it suffers from deep moral downfalls. The main issue that causes debate seems to be if artificial superiority is a viable alternative to nature. It could work in society if people only used it for things such as evading cancer, but if a new social class is formed or people start creating super humans, it’s unquestionably a problem.
While many can argue that pure research is just as beneficial as applied science since it can help prepare for things we do not know are coming, such as future problems. For example, we probably would not have known about global warming or the reason why plants and animals exist without pure research. Pure research is important because the human race is curious about its origins and about the world around them. However, applied science is more useful as applied science helps solve the basic problems the human race faces first, before allowing them to confront the issues that pure research hopes to answer. Pure research satiates the world’s desire to figure out how the world works, but this may only benefit a part of the human race.
Some people are losing themselves and their culture that they originated from by its assimilation and melting pot effect. There are movements promoting culture, so that we may learn from it and bring it back to life, but due to the still evident amounts of judgement and... ... middle of paper ... ...ence and remain neutral unless a future event turns the tables. Globalization affects sustainable prosperity but in many different ways, in ways that can help and harm the people of the world. There are advantages and disadvantages which don't allow a straight "it affects sustainable prosperity in a good way" or "it affects sustainable prosperity in a bad way" answer. Because it has aspects of both sides, the only true answer is it can help our sustainable prosperity in someways, but it can also affect other prosperity that isn't so sustainable.
The principal purpose of genetic engineering is to cure deadly diseases, contrary the principal purpose of genetic enhancement is to improve the human capacities, for example make them more handsome , taller or more smarter. The pricipal reason why genetic enhancement should not be allowed is because it would limit children 's autonomy to shape their own destinies. Dr. Arthur Caplan Ph.D. serves as Chief of the Division of Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, states “Renegade scientists and totalitarian loonies are not the folks most likely to abuse genetic engineering. You and I are--not because we are bad, but because we want to do good. In a world dominated by competition, parents understandably want to give their kids every advantage.
Sure, there are downsides to cloning, and yes it can be dangerous if it is used for the wrong purposes. This is true with almost any new technology. From gunpowder to cars to airplanes to computers to the Internet; any one of these technologies can be harnessed for negative purposes. Despite the risks involved however, all of these technologies have improved our standard of living and quality of life, and I feel cloning will do the same. Wesley J. Smith goes on and on about how eugenicists would want to create homogeneity among Humans, valuing traits such as intelligence and looks instead of love, compassion, and empathy.
Much of the data collected and methods used by eugenicists determined why certain individuals were malleable to a society. There were many reasons why eugenics failed then and it is still flawed today. Human genetic engineering is eliminates certain traits to continue in future generations to man make a perfect society. Even with a perfect society there will be people who will not be able to fit that category. There are some negative long-term effects to human genetic engineering.
The process that scientist must go through to genetically alter a gene is provide the gene to be transferred, a host cell in which the gene is inserted, and a vector to bring about the transfer, in which the enhancement is made possible. Considering that enhancement is perceived as improving the image of individuals can be beneficial, in which influences society to turn to genetic enhancements because of the expectations that the world as a whole view enhancements. However, genetic enhancements can impede the natural cycle of life and with an excessive amount of humans; it can create a lack of natural resources to sustain human life. Therefore, society believes that enhancement carries a positive connation that perceives society to further pursue in such behaviors. On the contrary, in today’s science, the advanced technology of genetic enhancements allows the ability to manipulate a baby’s preset genes which can affect society’s threshold of the image of beauty and disrupt the biological gene pool creating a society that is based on superiority and a new defined definition of “beautiful”.
The purpose on invention of technology was meant to make human’s life easier, faster and burden less. Technology has made life a lot easier on us and I am not trying to say technology is bad because, I personally would have a hard time functioning without it. However, there comes a point when we need to set boundaries on how much technology “intake” we consume because, not all good things stay good. There are negative side effects to technology as you can see and we need to be aware of them in order to control it.
It could be one key factor is destroying the flow of the world we live in. For example, people with enough money will benefit from what “would likely be ‘unnatural’ enhancements to human talent” (Heller). Yet, at the same time, it comes to everyone’s attention that these changes will just make human bodies have “more energy, less sleep, smarter analysis…better digestion, [and] tougher bodies” (Mehlman). Anything that was created to make each person unique whether it is flaws, body type, intelligence, or athleticism will be blended into the norm. It is like the new science has disguised itself as God to c... ... middle of paper ... ...r7.html>.
Although genetic engineering seems to be more harmful than helpful, when used correctly, it will help the society prosper. Considering the technology our society has currently developed, genetic engineering is a difficult topic to discuss and confirm. If the researchers confirm this process, it may become easier for the scientists and will help cure the diseases easily. The debate, however, will still be on the rise because of the issue in human morals and ethics.