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.
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. He feels that this would create an unnatural society of human beings, creating chaos among the world. What he fails to recognize however is that it is not nearly as simple to do this as he thinks. Right now, cloning is in its very elementary stages, and most research being done is for medical purposes. Through advancing our knowledge in cloning and genetic engineering, we can eliminate unwanted traits and genetic diseases.
Genetic engineering is an amazing science advancing at such a fast-pace, but because of moral and ethical concerns, research into this new technology has been limited. In his article, `Will genetic engineering produce a master race and a servile multitude?' published in the Pectator magazine 1999, Paul Johnson explores the perils of genetic engineering and the ethical dilemma facing scientists and the intellectual community. He asserts that genetic engineering will create a caste society consisting of a genetically enhanced overclass and a suppressed, skilless underclass. He argues that playing god with genetics is immoral and that it will bring into being a society "biologically evil in ways we can scarcely imagine."
Genetic enhancement appears to be inevitable since technology is making a rapid turn towards genetic enhancement. Because of this fact, concerns over how beneficial or harmful genetic enhancement would be in the future have arisen. We, as a society, need to analyze both sides and decide for ourselves whether we should support the progression of genetic enhancement or do everything in our power to stall or halt it. Genetic enhancement refers to the use of genetic engineering to modify a person’s nonpathological human traits. This concept is aimed at improving the quality of life of humans.
The species may eliminate other species causing the food chain to change. Biotechnology is a great danger to the human species. Imagine people walking around looking like twins but one is better in every way then the other. There is already enough racism in this world why do we need to set new standard of a persons well being in his or her society. If scientist were to clone people they could improve the clone, putting the natural human specie at a lower level of life.
Yet, in spite of the necessity of science in our life, what are the reasons that many of us are scared of science and scientists and what causes the fear of science in our society? Clearly, most of us have some unknown fear toward science. Regarding individual’s apprehension toward science a Nobel Prize professor, Michael Bishop, in his article "Enemies of Promise", has stated: "Resistance to science is born of fear. Fear, in turn, is born by ignorance. And it is ignorance that is our deepest malady" (p241).
Martin Seymour-Smith. London : Shuckburgh Reynolds Ltd., 1980, 154-155. Wagenknecht, Edward. “Nathaniel Hawthorne.” Cavalcade of the American Novel. New York : Henry Holt and Company, 1952, 90, 9, 20, 25, 38-57.
The thought of performing the procedure over and over multiple times does not help the human mind and the society we are in. Just imagine if you get cloned and on your mind and thoughts you have high expectations of your clone, but do not receive what you hoped. This will create a lot of injustice than what we already have going on now. Cloning will just mean to add more misunderstanding of the real purpose. Like everything else in this world we will use the cloning method to commit copious misconduct, for example, creating an attack army, increased malpractice, or insufficient research, along with additional disadvantages.
However, the odds of finding a donor grim. Wouldn't it be nice if the technology to clone a perfectly matching organ to replace the faulty one existed? This is the problem with today's society. Too many people are afraid of the future. Cloning, like any other science is hindered by the general public's fear of the unknown.