preview

Dan W. Brock's Analysis

Decent Essays

Dan W. Brock makes a few interesting points in defending genetic engineering, while being observant of the possible downfalls and negative views of the science. Brock starts of his commentary by addressing how the limits to our genes can not "confidently predict the rate at which that understanding [of genetic engineering] will be achieved in the future nor the ultimate limits on it" (pg. 615). Also, the author states how genetic engineering could help parents ensure their children the abilities to live healthy lives, create new treatments for disease, and produce stronger immune systems. In fact, according to Brock, "treatment of disease that restores normal human function is typically and uncontroversially assumed to benefit persons" (pg. 617). I personally agree with Brock's argument, if genetic engineering could restore the autonomy of individuals suffering from diseases or traits that act as constraints on general human function, then it should be supported. In this regard the author depicts the opposite side of the spectrum, a likely venue for perfectly healthy individuals to seek enhancements, past what is typical for humans. It’s questionable whether or not these enhancements would be taken as a form of competitive advantage against other individuals. Personally, I believe that enhancements like these could be detrimental to …show more content…

After all, life and the natural world are very complex and organized structures that humans have only recently begun to realize how to manipulate. I believe Brock makes an excellent argument in addressing potential concerns from skeptics. This argument is highlighted in his conclusion when Brock says, "some people will condemn any such intervention as 'playing God,' but I believe the potential for human benefit makes any general moral bar to their use unjustified" (pg.

Get Access