Eugenics Perfect Society

We are living is a world where very soon it will be possible for people to create ‘designer babies’ that have all the features they wish for. In the article Building Baby from the Genes Up, Ronald M. Green talks about all the positive impacts that genetic modification of human beings can have on our future generations. Green acknowledges some of the negatives such as parents creating perfect children and being able to give them any trait the parent wants. However in the end he comes to the conclusion that the positive impacts of getting rid of genes that cause obesity, cancer, learning disorders, and many other diseases and disorders, outweighs the negative aspects. Richard Hayes, author of Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks, takes the stance that we should not be able to change anything about human beings through genetic modification. He believes that once we start modifying a few features, it will slowly turn into every parent altering as many of their babies’ genes that they want. While he does acknowledge the positive impacts of getting rid of negative genes such as Tay-Sachs, he believes that it is not worth the risk of having parents manipulate all their future children’s genes to their liking. Green and Hayes stand on opposite sides of the debate about genetic modification of human beings and this essay will explore the similarities and the differences of their articles.

I support the guidelines outlined by Kitcher for the use of genetic information because of their responsible and ethical nature. I believe that future generations will benefit as a direct consequence of these guidelines. I shall begin by defining eugenics as the study of human genetics to improve inherited characteristics of the human race by the means of controlled selective breeding.

Lack of scientific knowledge about genetic biology was the primary reason why eugenics movement died out towards the latter half of the 20th century. It was concluded that there was actually no significant way to identify “fit” families. The eugenics movement unjustly called people unfit without reason. The primary downside to the eugenics movement in the United States is that scientist paid too much attention to the genetic correlations between class and genes, but rarely looked at the environmental factors that affected the class. Essentially what the eugenics movement did was called families that were alcoholics and thieves due to your genes. An argument could have been very easily made that these families were

Eugenics is defined, in some way or the other, as the process of reshaping the human race by determining the kinds of people who will be born. As such, there is much debate in the field of eugenics, with authors, like Philip Kitcher, who support laissez-faire or a minimalist approach of eugenics in which eugenic decision-making should be limited only to avoid neurological illnesses and in which parental free choice is valued. Gregory Stock’s essay, The Enhanced and Un-Enhanced, presents otherwise by supporting the position of maximalist eugenics, allowing individuals the full extent in the selection of genes. On the other hand, the film, Gattaca, raises major ethical problems by illustrating a dystopian society resulted by extensive

Hell is a road that was paved with good intentions; this cliché quintessentially describes the eugenics movement. Eugenics is the controlled reproduction of individuals; the main focus of eugenics is to isolate “good” genes from “bad” genes (Dolan DNA Learning Center). The main goal of Eugenics is to create a higher quality human race (Dolan DNA Learning Center). This movement became the center of which the twentieth century orbited around. The movement swayed numerous significant policies, which were implemented within the United States, ranging from immigration to sterilization (Selden). What is truly unsettling is the radical nature of the eugenics movement, which was originally founded with good intentions by Francis Galton (Carlson). The Eugenics movement made headway owing to the fact that America was frantic for a solution to social problems and believed that this scientific approach was the solution it yearned for; this is evident from the origin, purpose, supporters and policies that resulted from eugenics.

Although this may be the case in many areas of people’s lives today, it is not always beneficial, or necessary. People may have trouble deciding whether messing with human genes and cells is ethical. Designing the “perfect child” in many parent’s eyes becomes a harsh question of reality. The concept of a parent’s unconditional love for their child is questioned because of the desire to make their child perfect. If genetically engineering humans becomes a dominant medical option, people could have the chance to create their child however they like: from physical appearances, genetically enhanced genes, and the possibility to decide what a child thinks and acts, parents have access to designing their entire child. Naturally, people could be creating a super-human. Issues between different races, and eventually creating new prejudices against genetically engineered humans may increase. People may not realize how expensive genetic screening is at first. With only the rich being able to “enhance” their children, another social issue might occur, giving the world another type of people to outcast.

Eugenics is the social construction of the human race by controlling reproduction. “Reducing the number of unfit people the term refers to the effort to improve a human population by either encouraging the reproduction of desired traits or preventing the reproduction of undesirable one” (Bethel University). The eugenics movement in America support laws that enforce racial segregation at the level of marriage, family planning, sterilization of the poor, disabled and education about human reproduction. They are in favor of reproduction among those thought to be the most genetically fit with characteristics such as hardworking, intelligent and physically fit. On the other had the movement discourage reproduction of the unfit considered to have

Starting in the late 19th century, American philosophers, theorists, and scientists began experimenting and theorizing the idea of eugenics. Derived from Darwinian theories and the extensive works of Gregor Mendel, eugenics is known as a set of practices aimed at enhancing the human genome into sameness. Edwin Black’s “War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race” looks at the horrific background of eugenics, the ones who supported it, and the twisted ends it came to. This source, along with the two others, brings light to the awful means pursued to obtain a brilliant, but illogical and immoral goal of sameness. Overall, a negative vibe is shown through these sources.

Just think about a human race free of genetic disease where everyone is intelligent and where society and technology advance at staggering rates. This is the future that is envisioned by those who advocate eugenics. Eugenics is the study of methods to improve the human race by selection of parents based on their inherited characteristics (Hartl). The idea was first discussed by Sir Francis Galton in the 1880’s, but was widely unaccepted by people at first due to fear that it would take away their basic human rights and be misused (Hartl). In the early 20th century, eugenics was a very popular and widespread idea in the United States and there were laws created to encourage certain people to have children, while discouraging others from procreating (Morris 66). The main reason eugenics has fell into such disfavor is because the Nazis cited it as the reason for the Holocaust (Morris 66). The use of eugenics by the Nazis can be compared to the use Islam by ISIS, or the use of Christianity by the Westboro Baptist Church. It is a concept that can be misused based on interpretation and extremism. Eugenics itself is just an idea to improve the human race by selective breeding, not by killing millions. Forms of eugenics should be implemented in society because they eliminate genetic diseases and problems, spread favorable traits and attributes, create a more intelligent and less flawed society, and help advance the human race as a whole.

I agree with you that it is most likely a public health movement because it is geared towards preventing mental illness and disabilities in the future generation. It’s meant to help improve the health of the public. But, like you say, all the details in the plan and movement are designed by people, by society. Early on, eugenics was geared towards creating a better society by categorizing what is good and what is bad. But who and what decides on what is good and what is bad? I agree with you that automatically there will be social and racial groups that are isolated and labeled inferior, otherwise, it defeats the purpose of eugenics because we wouldn’t know what is superior. Therefore, I argue that the idea of a perfect person is all socially

There is much bias and confusion surrounding the topic of eugenics. Many times the reason for this is the lack of understanding of what the term means, where it states “In 1883, Sir Francis Galton, a respected British scholar, and cousin of Charles Darwin, first used the term eugenics, meaning ‘well-born.’ (Genetics Generation, 2015).” This term has evolved to encompass more than just “well-born” as can be seen in the encyclopedia. “The eleventh edition of The Encyclopedia Britannica defines eugenics as ‘the organic betterment of the race through wise application of the laws of heredity.’ (Court, 2004).” The meaning of the word eugenics, due to the way it has been used, confuses many people.

One now has the ability to alter their child’s hair and eye color which Hitler tried to do with killing the men, women and children that didn't fit the look of his ideal “Aryan race”. With the availability of choosing a child’s characteristics there could essentially be a more popularized and desired look that become the trend, and could lead to the type of segregated beliefs as pushed in Nazi Germany. The ability to have people choose their unborn child’s genetic makeup will most likely be only available to the wealthy from the cost of this procedure, and may lead to segregation from the ideal look that the wealthy would choose. A comparable look at this concept would be “The climate in Nazi Germany from 1939 onwards, if not earlier, was dangerous for those who did not fit the ideal Aryan race, and those who did not conform to Nazi beliefs were under the threat of work camps or even death”. Changing a society's characteristics could accidentally rank the people of our society from their wealth, the Nazi’s eliminated the races and unfit characteristics they felt were below them by killing off them. Giving the opportunity to make the wealthy look even more considerably different from the poor and have alike traits would create a more civil divide that could be compared to the divide in Nazi Germany. People would don’t have the traits chosen

The theory of Eugenics can be dated back all the way to 400 B.C. but was not popularized until the mid-1800s by an English scientist, Francis Galton. He researched and published the theory that aimed to improve the genetic quality of the human population through selective breeding (NC Office of Archives and History). As the half-cousin of Charles Darwin, Galton applied the Darwinism science (survival of the fittest) to heredity characteristics. Two types of Eugenics stemmed from the theory, positive and negative. Positive eugenics is encouraging the “best” people in the society based on financial and personal features to have more children while negative eugenics is picking people with flaws and defects from the population

The roots of eugenics can be traced back to Britain in the early 1880’s when Sir Francis Galton generated the term from the Greek word for “well-born”. He defined eugenics as the science of improving stock, whether human or animal. According to the American Eugenics Movement, today’s study of eugenics has many similarities to studies done in the early 20th century. Back then, “Eugenics was, quite literally, an effort to breed better human beings – by encouraging the reproduction of people with "good" genes and discouraging those with "bad" genes.” (www.eugenicsarchive.org) According to Merriam-Webster, the modern day definition of eugenics is, a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of