Human Enhancement Qualify As Therapy

Humanity is always trying to find a way to make themselves better. In recent news, this has led to a moral debate on weather or not using performance enhancing drugs for sports is morally correct or not. But, what if we had already manipulated the human body to make it better before we were even born? This is what Bill McKibben is referencing in his essay “Designer Genes”, on the morality and the biological arms race that could result when dealing with genetic manipulation and engineering. Though the cat isn’t out of the bag for genetic engineering he references what scientists are doing to skim the fine line that laws and ethics have laid down for us. McKibben’s audience is people who can make laws

In Designer People, Sally Deneen, exclaims, " It will start innocently enough: Birth defects that are caused by a single gene, such as cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease, will be targeted first, and probably with little controversy. Then, as societal fears about messing with Mother Nature subside, Silver and other researchers predict that a genetic solution to preventing diabetes, heart disease and other big killers will be found and offered". So will genetic inoculations against HIV. Eventually, the mind will be targeted for improvement--preventing alcohol addiction and mental illness, and enhancing visual acuity or intelligence to try to produce the next Vincent Van Gogh or Albert Einstein. Even traits from other animals

Humans are on a constant quest in the search for perfection and advancement in all areas of life through progressive scientific knowledge. From such a stance, the future of humans appears boundless with all the potential possibilities biotechnology provides, but such developments will cause ethical, social and biological implications.

It seems like every few month scientists make the next breakthrough in combining technology and human biology. More and more things that only existed in science fiction like mutants and biological enhancements have become reality. But unlike other improvement in our society, the concept of human engineering has become an issue of ethics. As this reality human engineering draws closer-everyone from scholars to

The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically to the use of genetic intervention prior to

Julian Savulescu wrote Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings and in this article he clearly states his position on the issues as well as providing supporting and opposing sides to the matter. He starts off by explaining this issue is focused on biological enhancement and more specifically genetic enhancement. Then the thesis statement is provided, “I want to argue that, far from it’s being merely permissible, we have a moral obligation or moral reason to enhance ourselves and our

When dealing with the morality of making ourselves more than human we need to draw a line between therapy and enhancement. Several proponents of the human enhancement argument, or transhumanists, are rather loathe to separate the two for a few reasons. Currently, modern medicine practices several methods of treatment that can be considered enhancements, as there is nothing currently wrong with the patient so there is technically nothing to treat. This includes things like vaccines, preventative care, and cosmetic surgery. (Bostrom, Roache 1) Another is that we treat things that are intrinsic to the person, such as a genetic or mental disorder. We use things such as chemicals or surgery to bring the person to a level as close to “average” human as possible. Their personal baseline of their physiology is brought up to speed with humanity and they tend to live happier lives. However, even though the argument is quite sound, human nature is much more complex. While we hopefully like to celebrate others ' individuality, we still want to strengthen those we see as weak, while at the same time maintaining our own superiority. This is where the fundamental difference between therapy and enhancements lie. While we want everyone to be

In the first portion of Sandel’s paper titled, The Case Against Perfection, Michael Sandel discussed the moral and ethics debate surrounding the notion of in the future designing our offspring by altering their genes prior to conception. Within his argument, Sandal focuses on four main arguments surrounding the following realms of enhancement: muscles, memory, growth hormone treatment, and reproductive technologies (Sandel 52). Firstly, Sandel argues that genetic modifications in improving muscles whether it be to aid in the elderly population, a majority whom struggle with immobility and must rely upon medical devices such as wheelchairs, walkers, or are restricted to their homes and consequently often have a decreased quality of life.

The foundations of prinicpilist ethics are: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. The trans-human perspective does not directly cross any of these boundaries, however, it may very well set the precedent for unethical practices and systems. The trans-human perspective allows for genetic, pharmaceutical, and technological enhancement to improve human capacities. Developing means for said alterations require heavy funding, so it is feasible to say that those who develop such means will require compensation from those planning to benefit from them. So, unless an alteration is deemed medically necessary by a providing institution (such as healthcare coverage from a government), one must opt to pay privately for these human-enhancing

Recent breakthroughs in the field of genetics and biotechnology have brought attention to the ethical issues surrounding human enhancement. While these breakthroughs have many positive aspects, such as the treatment and prevention of many debilitating diseases and extending human life expectancy well beyond its current limits, there are profound moral implications associated with the ability to manipulate our own nature. Michael Sandel’s “The Case Against Perfection” examines the ethical and moral issues associated with human enhancement while Nick Bostrom’s paper, “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity” compares the positions that transhumanists and bioconservatists take on the topic of human enhancement. The author’s opinions on the issue of

Should augmentations be allowed? Should those who have them be accepted in society? Can you really trust a man whose arms include a blade, and are strong enough to punch through walls with ease?

Miah, an English bioethicist, academic and journalist, addresses the topic of genetic modification through the processes and technologies used in cloning and genetic modification in things such as food. The article discusses the potential threats that we may encounter when genetically modifying humans. In addition, Miah explains that we, as humans, have been genetically modifying other aspects of life, such as animals, for decades and that this technology is not new or unknown by humans. Specifically focuses on genetic modification and how that can benefit athletes. The book makes a strong comparison between the use of performance enhancement drugs, such as steroids, that have since, been made illegal in the world of sports. It refers to a

Author Chuck Klosterman said, “The simple truth is that we’re all already cyborgs more or less. Our mouths are filled with silver. Our nearsighted pupils are repaired with surgical lasers. We jam diabetics full of delicious insulin. Almost 40 percent of Americans now have prosthetic limbs. We see to have no qualms about making post-birth improvements to our feeble selves. Why are we so uncomfortable with pre-birth improvement?” Despite Klosterman’s accurate observation, there are reasons people are wearisome toward pre-birth enhancement. Iniquitous practices such as genetic engineering could lead to a degraded feeling in a child and conceivably end in a dystopian society, almost like the society Adolf Hitler had in mind. In the minds of

Garreau, Joel. Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies- and What It Means to Be Human. New York: Random House, 2005. Print.

Humanity has come a long way as we evolve and adapt to the changing environment. Through the years, we have managed to overcome several limitations, which in the past were nothing more than dreams. We succeeded in landing on the moon and communicating over long distance, yet there are still some boundaries we have yet to cross despite our best effort. Aging is an inevitable process of nature. While we cannot stop the ticking clock in our body, we have made it possible for aging to be delayed and relieved to a great extent through advance technology and modern governance. High-tech equipments and medications are available for the treatments of more illnesses as our understanding of medicine improves and governments nowadays are doing