Factor X Fukuyama

In today 's world, the role of technology has become primal and a necessity in our daily lives. In The Dalai Lama, we are able to see the astounding capabilities that the new technological advancements are able to do. However, to only a certain extent are these advancements beneficial, as these improvements can as well lead to serious matters in regards to our system of ethics and moral reasoning. By being able to establish a limit on the use of these advancements, it is possible to create a balance between the benefits of the technological improvements and being able to maintain a system of global ethics. The role of genetic manipulation, cloning and selection of traits all have potential in providing humanity with assistance in making daily living an unchallenging asset.

In an ever evolving society, the increased use of technology has become a staple in our day to day lives. With the constant advancements of technology the ideology of cloning has now become a reality. The increasing use of science today is slowly leading to the development of cloning and genetic selection. By altering the genetic make-up of a being, scientists have brought about several questions on how the population would adjust to the “super-beings,” and what benefits and consequences both human and non-humans would gain with their creations? Authors Francis Fukuyama, who wrote “Human Dignity,” and The Dalai Lama, writer of “Ethics and the New Genetics,” has called into question the use of cloning and how it could possibly affect others. With the creation of “super-beings,” humans would ultimately suffer a bigger separation from each other and create unfairness among the human species such as a stronger and more intelligent being.

Gregory Stock, in his article Choosing Our Genes, asserts that at this point not ethics are important, but rather the future of genetic technology. Stock supports his conclusion by providing powerful examples of how genetic modifications can benefit our population anywhere from correcting genes at the time of conception to extending lifespan. He wants to inform his audience about all of the benefits of genetic technology in order to prove that there are way more advantages in this technology that are highly desirable by people of different ages. He reaches his readers by writing a very detailed yet coherent article that brings awareness to various groups of people from parents to be to older populations.

The author of this article, Francis Fukuyama, is fearful that biotechnology will transform human nature as it did in Brave New World. Biotechnology will shift us into

Contrary to Kitcher’s minimalist model that constrains eugenic decisions only to avoid neurological diseases, Gregory Stock’s position in the debate defends maximalist eugenics in which individuals have total free eugenic decision-making, including enhancement, without any state coercion. He wants readers to accept and adopt such a position by arguing that genetic engineering such as selecting and alternating embryos is an inevitable future and human destiny (7, Stock, CC p.279). For example, if redesigning humans became commonplace, Stock reasons that parents would give their children endowments they desire but could not otherwise obtain and thus further expand life’s possibilities to the next generation (8, Stock, CC p.276). In this society, people’s genes would become an embodiment of their parents’ values and preferences. People would arguably want such endowments since they would view modifications as beneficial in

Through these “battles”, authors also display their rhetorical prowess. One eloquent example of these “rhetorical battles” is the bout between the progressive Ronald M. Green and the conservative Richard Hayes. In his article “Building Baby from the Genes Up”, Green advocates for genetic engineering- realizing the inevitability of this new technology due the potential it has in improving mankind. Hayes responds to Green’s stance on human genetic modification in his own article “ Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks.” Hayes’s own stance of the subject is polarizing to Green’s. Hayes believes that genetic engineering will not benefit society at all and in fact Hayes believes it would take away our humanity; claiming genetic engineering would “undermine the human community.”

Nowadays, people will claim that the world is on the verge of scientific revolution that leads to the most controversial idea; genetic engineering of humans. When science technology grows exponentially faster than moral understanding, therein lies the argument between these two aspects. One can argue that genetic engineering is some sort of vast achievement in technology especially in this modern era whereby people live in full of access. However, if we look closely at the impact of this technology towards human beings, genetic engineering has many flaws and ramifications that can be debated thoroughly. Arguments and points of view are explained by Michael J. Sandel, the author of “The Case Against Perfection” and Nicholas Agar, the author of “Liberal Eugenics”.

An Enhanced Genotype: Ethical Issues Involved with Genetic Engineering and their Impact as Revealed by Brave New World

In the ‘not-to-distant future’, the world of Gattaca is where genetic engineering has become the normal approach to procreation. Gattaca’s society involves a culture of self-advancement through genetic determinisms, a caste system of valid and in-valids and social discrimination based on ‘genoism’. This sterile and cold society of elitist collaborations like Gattaca promotes competition, isolation and discrimination. This is something that is dangerous to individuals and relationships and shows an arrogant belief to the world of science. Despite this hierarchical world it isn’t the technology that stands alone as dangerous to individuals, instead it is the human sprit or lack of it and the desire one has to reach their dreams that have an

Malik, Kenan. "Concerns About Biotechnology Altering Human Nature Are Groundless." Designer Babies, edited by Clayton Farris Naff, Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010850213/OVIC?u=j170902014&xid=e7789a12. Accessed 31 Mar. 2017. Originally published as "Reviews: Francis Fukuyama, Our Posthuman Future," New Statesman, 20 May 2002.

The Fred Factor by Mark Sanborn is about creating passion in your life and how that can make your life extraordinary. The book begins by explaining what the “Fred Factor” is and who it was named after. It then gives some guidelines on how to become a Fred by following a certain way of thinking. The book also goes over how to seek out and develop other Freds in your life. It concludes by giving an update on the original Fred, Fred Shea.

From cloning to genetically modified food to designer babies, humans have long been known to interfere with the way nature does things; humans have been modifying genes and improving the outlook in the pretext that it improves the quality of our lives. Humans also have a long history of interfering with and trying to control the more divine

Genetic engineering has become increasingly normalized in today’s society, and people are exposed to this technology now more than ever before. Most people are aware that food companies practice genetic engineering on their plants in order to design the most profitable crops, but it isn’t generally known that this same technology can be applied to humans. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential side effects may follow considering that it is unknown what genetic engineering could affect in future generations. Francis Fukuyama, an accomplished and distinguished professor of political economy and philosopher, conveys his concern that genetic engineering is developing at a surprisingly rapid rate. Within his book, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, he claims that genetic engineering not only will potentially be detrimental for the human race, but due to the change in nature of human beings, such engineering will also result in significantly impacting government and politics. Although genetic engineering can be seen as a huge technological advancement that could potentially help millions, there are drastic negative effects and reasons for disapproving genetic engineering that are too important to be overlooked.

Biology is the science of life. Technology uses science to solve problems. Our society has progressed in its understanding of life to the point that we are able to manipulate it on a fundamental level through technology. This has led to profound ethical dilemmas. The movie Gattaca explores some important bioethical issues that are currently the focus of much dispute. The underlying thematic issue presented is the question of the extent to which biologically inherent human potential determines the true potential of a person. Perhaps the most controversial issue in Gattaca is the use of genetic engineering technology in humans to create a more perfect society; this is, essentially, a new

On the most surface level, human genetic engineering and human genetic modification are a new and rapidly developing field of science that deals with directly altering the DNA (genetic makeup) of a living human cell. From early science fiction to the present day, taking control of humans’ gen es and directing the flow of evolution has been a subject of debate for many people. Human genetic engineering or HGE tends to bring up thoughts of dystopian futures where altering DNA has unexpectedly resulted in horrible mutant humans that can’t survive and thus the human race perishes, but this is not necessarily the outcome. Since genetic engineering is an emerging field of science, there are still many moral and ethical issues that need to be addressed before continuing research. Atheists and theists both have valid reasons to support / resist the continuation of this field of science. For the purpose of this paper, it will be assumed the reader has a reasonable understanding of the terms atheism, theism, DNA, genes, genome, and how a persons DNA (their genotype) essentially dictates the physical appearance and abilities that person portrays (their phenotype).