The Ethics of Genetic Engineering By Karina Toy The finale of reveals that Bertrand Zobrist, the Inferno, Dan Brown’s latest novel, that for the past seven days has infected every person antagonist, has created a “sterility plague,” in the world. (Brown 438). This plague is meant to solve the issue of overpopulation by genetically altering human beings and rendering a random one third of the population infertile. The protagonist, Robert Langdon, sees this solution as “‘…genetic terrorism…..it’s changing who we are, who the (Brown 439). On the other we’ve always been, at most fundamental level’” side is the in of fixing the fatal flaw in human antagonist’s perspective, which he “…dreamed that our species is seem to control our own evolution….the fact simply too prolific…we can’t (Brown 439). This essay focuses on the ethics of genetic engineering by looking at numbers” both sides: from the perspective of changing at the most fundamental level, to the humans’ perspective of improving a species. It assumes that genetic engineering at the scope of this book is already scientifically possible and perfected, so any safety and health risks of the unknown are null. In addition, this work focuses solely on somatic genetic enhancement, which is genetic engineering of the body that aims to improve the functioning of the human individual, and avoids the topics of GMOs or cloning (Koepsell 5). It simply looks at whether genetically modifying humans is ethical from different standpoints in philosophy, religion, bioethics, and policy making. Philosophy In philosophy the main argument against genetic engineering is that it violates the of humans to alter their DNA under any circumstance (Rifkin). The inherent “dignity” “natural” state of humans, unaltered by mortal intervention, is inherently dignified. According to this train
The Ethics of Genetic Engineering By Karina Toy The finale of Dan Brown’s latest novel, Inferno, reveals that Bertrand Zobrist, the antagonist, has created a “sterility plague,” that for the past seven days has infected every person in the world. (Brown 438). This plague is meant to solve the issue of overpopulation by genetically altering human beings and rendering a random one third of the population infertile. The protagonist, Robert Langdon, sees this solution as “‘…genetic terrorism…..it’s changing who we are, who we’ve always been, at the most fundamental level’” (Brown 439). On the other side is the antagonist’s perspective, in which he “…dreamed of fixing the fatal flaw in human evolution….the fact that our species is simply too prolific…we can’t seem to control our own numbers” (Brown 439). This essay focuses on the ethics of genetic engineering by looking at both sides: from the perspective of changing humans’ at the most fundamental level, to the perspective of improving a species. It assumes that genetic engineering at the scope of this book is already scientifically possible and perfected, so any safety and health risks of the unknown are null. In addition, this work focuses solely on somatic genetic enhancement, which is genetic engineering of the body that aims to improve the functioning of the human individual, and avoids the topics of GMOs or cloning (Koepsell 5). It simply looks at whether genetically modifying humans is ethical from different standpoints in philosophy, religion, bioethics, and policy making. Philosophy In philosophy the main argument against genetic engineering is that it violates the inherent “dignity” of humans to alter their DNA under any circumstance (Rifkin). The “natural” state of humans, unaltered by mortal intervention, is inherently dignified. According to this train