In the past, losing a limb and surviving often meant the start of a life with disability.

Medical advancements are very important for extending the quality and quantity of life, however a strong moral compass is needed to make sure, in the name of science, ethical and moral science are not crossed. Brave New World, written by Aldous Huxley, and the movie Gattaca propose a technologically advanced society that challenges these ethical and moral views. Although Brave New World and Gattaca relate in the aspect of genetic discrimination, they differ in the limits and powers of technology and the effects of human spirit.

Tissue engineering, labeled by Time.com as the number one hottest job for the 21st century, holds great potential for medicine and the treatment of chronic diseases and disorders. With tissue engineering, familiar problems like the rejection of foreign tissue by the body, the severe shortage of organ donors, and the inefficiency of artificial devices may be solved. However, this cutting edge biotechnology has already spurred intense controversy over the ethics and morality of creating spare human body parts.

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.

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

Life extensions are critically dependent on futuristic medical advancements. However, a strong noble compass is needed to ensure scientific advancements do not cross moral ethics of life. Brave New World, written by Aldous Huxley, and the movie Gattaca, directed by Andrew Niccol, propose technologically advanced societies that challenge ethical and moral views. Although Brave New World and Gattaca relate in genetic discrimination, they differ in technology’s powers and limits, as well as the resiliency of the human spirit.

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

The film GATTACA and the short story, “Nine Lives,” exemplifies the ethics of altering human life at the genetic level, through techniques of genetic engineering. Throughout GATTACA, the ability to create improved, even superior forms of human life as a positive development through eugenics is shown as well as arousing questions about the moral implications of such engineering. The main protagonist in GATTACA, Vincent Freeman, battles with the discrimination of being an “invalid” in a world of “valids” and comes to realize that he is not an inferior being in the midst of an altered humanity. In “Nine Lives,” a lone survivor of the ten genetically engineered clones of John Chow struggle come to understand itself in relation to unaltered humanity and its individuality for the first time in its life. A dystopian society is produced when unaltered humans and genetically engineered beings coexist and interact with one another due to nefarious social practices such filtering menial jobs only to “invalids” in GATTACA and the emphasis in the value of clones and their worth to society as collective work group rather than focusing on each individual’s contribution to society. The film GATTACA exhibits the adverse nature of eugenics while “Nine Lives” stresses the importance of individualism instead of collectivism and fend off the need to be reliant on others to feel welcomed in society.

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

The technology is used to help humans overcome the physical and/ or mental limitations of the human body, resulting in the temporary or permanent augmentation of a person's abilities and features. In the piece, “The Case Against Perfection,” Michael J. Sandel argues that genetic enhancement is morally questionable. I will argue why his reasoning, more specifically his defense of “the giftedness of life,” is irrational. In this essay, I will explain Sandel’s moral objection against genetic enhancement, argue that his idea of “giftedness” is not as valuable as he states, and finally consider why my argument could be seen as fallible.

The issue of bioethics has become so prevalent it has also arisen in popular culture. The best example of this being the movie Repo! The Genetic Opera¸ which takes place in the future, years after an epidemic of organ failure wreaked havoc on the population of man. During this time a “savior” arose in the form of Rotti Largo who developed the Bio-Tech Company GeneCo. GeneCo

Often is the question asked, “Has science gone too far?” In no case is said question more pertinent than in Andre Niccol’s, Gattaca, a film that depicts a futuristic dystopia in which humanity has grown into two distinct castes: the valids, or those who were genetically modified in utero to do away with defects; and the invalids, or those who were conceived and born naturally. A harsh schism has been forged between these two, wherein the valids occupy the upper echelons of society, and the invalids are relegated to menial tasks without prospect of improvement. The valids, is essence, have become the new standard for humanity, thus resulting in the invalids being seen as less than human and therefor treated as such; however, despite that in Andrew Niccol’s, Gattaca, the protagonist, Vincent Anton Freeman, is dehumanized in his inability to move up in society, he nonetheless is able to transcend the chains that bind him and prove his humanity.

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

Opening/Attention: Humans, through science, have been playing “God” since before the industrial revolution. This is nothing new. We have brought great improvements to our population’s standard of life by developing cures for diseases and controlling epidemics, by reducing child mortality and increasing life expectancy, and by discovering new sources of energy while increasing industrial and agricultural production. Furthermore, access to information no longer depends on social class or geographical location thanks to the Internet. As many researchers and writers have noted, “the world has never had it so good.” But, in many cases humans are starting to take concepts of “improvement”, “evolution” and “perfection” to harmful extremes. One such example is that of Genetically Modified Organisms. Genetically modified organisms, often referred to as GMOs, are organisms whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering; a scientific manipulation of the genome.

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).

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