STANCES ON GENETIC ENGINEERING

Bonilla, Timothy Joseph

STEM – F

Genetic engineering is a rapidly advancing field of science that holds the potential to revolutionize
human development. It promises groundbreaking benefits, such as curing cancer, eradicating genetic
diseases, and enhancing human capabilities. However, these possibilities also bring about significant
ethical and moral challenges. One of the most debated issues is whether altering human genes crosses
the line into taboo, raising concerns about the unforeseen consequences and the limits of human
intervention in nature.

The growing accessibility of information through modern media has brought genetic engineering into the
global spotlight, allowing people to learn about its implications and engage in meaningful discussions.
While some view it as the key to solving humanity's greatest health challenges, others worry about its
misuse and the societal inequalities it might create.

In this essay, I aim to explore both sides of this complex issue, highlighting the potential benefits and
risks while addressing the moral dilemmas it presents. By doing so, I hope to contribute to the ongoing
discussion about whether genetic engineering represents a leap forward for humanity or a step too far.

I once watched the movie Jurassic Park, and the concept fascinated me. The idea of using ancient DNA to
recreate dinosaurs in real life was both thrilling and thought-provoking. However, it also highlighted the
negative implications of such an endeavor—dinosaurs, after all, do not fit into the current ecosystem and
could pose a significant threat to humanity. The movie introduced me to the concept of DNA and its
fundamental role in every living organism. It made me wonder: if dinosaurs can theoretically be
resurrected, why not humans?

This led me to recall the thought experiment known as "The Ship of Theseus." It questions whether an
object that has had all its components replaced over time remains fundamentally the same object.
Applying this to humans raises a profound philosophical dilemma. If a person dies but is cloned
beforehand with an identical body and the same memories, is the clone still the same person?

The answer often varies, but it’s frequently argued that the individual is no longer the same. Greek
philosopher Heraclitus once said, “No man ever steps in the same river twice,” emphasizing the ever-
changing nature of existence. Similarly, cloning a person might replicate their physical appearance and
memories, but their identity would likely be considered distinct.

Although Jurassic Park doesn’t directly explore the possibility of resurrecting humans, it indirectly raises
questions about the boundaries of genetic engineering. I believe that while the technology might enable
human resurrection in theory, societal and ethical taboos present a significant barrier to pursuing such
experiments. The implications of manipulating life at such a fundamental level challenge both our moral
values and scientific boundaries, leaving these ideas in the realm of speculative fiction—for now.
Another film worth discussing is Gattaca. The title itself is derived from the four DNA bases—guanine,
adenine, thymine, and cytosine—which form the building blocks of life. The movie presents a thought-
provoking vision of a future where genetic engineering is universally embraced, shaping a society that
determines an individual's position in life solely based on their genetic makeup. This dystopian system
creates the illusion of a "perfect" and "complete" society, but in reality, it reinforces inequality and
oppression.

In the world of Gattaca, the ruling elite monopolizes access to superior genetic modifications, ensuring
that only those with wealth and privilege can afford to enhance their offspring. This leaves those who
lack the financial means—referred to as "Invalids"—trapped in a cycle of disadvantage, unable to
compete or advance in life. Their potential is dismissed simply because their genetic profiles are deemed
inferior. The movie highlights how such a system could exacerbate social and economic divides, turning
genetic engineering into a tool for entrenching class distinctions rather than erasing them.

The story follows Vincent Freeman, an "Invalid" who dreams of becoming an astronaut and going to
space—a goal that is seemingly unattainable for someone with his genetic background. Despite the
overwhelming odds, Vincent refuses to accept the limitations imposed on him by society. Through
determination, ingenuity, and grit, he challenges the system, proving that human potential cannot be
reduced to a string of genetic codes.

Gattaca serves as a cautionary tale about the ethical dilemmas and societal risks of genetic engineering.
It questions whether a world driven by genetic perfection would truly be ideal or if it would only deepen
existing inequalities, reminding us that human worth is more than just the sum of our genes.

After watching Moonfall, I was deeply intrigued by the concept of artificial intelligence using nanobots to
take over the world, ultimately threatening humanity by causing the moon to destroy Earth. This
thought-provoking premise led me to reflect on the nature of human evolution and sparked an idea I
strongly wish to express: if I were to evolve, I would want to become an iron-based life form.

I believe iron-based life forms represent the next step in evolution. Unlike carbon-based organisms,
which are driven by emotions and constrained by fragile bodies of flesh and blood, iron-based beings
would be powered by logic and built with the durability of hard steel. Such entities would embody
strength, resilience, and efficiency, free from the weaknesses that often define humanity.

In Moonfall, the AI appears to view humanity as an inferior species, one incapable of meeting its
standards of perfection. This perspective resonates with my belief that humanity, in its current form, is
limited by its emotional and physical vulnerabilities. The show made me imagine a world where
becoming a robot—an advanced, iron-based entity—is not only possible but desirable.

While the characters ultimately avert Earth's destruction at great cost, Moonfall raises profound
questions about evolution, survival, and what it means to transcend human limitations.

In conclusion, genetic engineering holds immense potential to revolutionize human life, offering
solutions to genetic diseases, enhancing physical and mental capabilities, and even extending life
expectancy. However, its advancement is accompanied by significant ethical and societal challenges.
From exacerbating inequalities to raising moral questions about altering the fabric of life, the
implications of this technology must be carefully considered. As we stand on the brink of this genetic
frontier, it is crucial to ensure that its application benefits humanity as a whole, rather than a privileged
few. Thoughtful regulation and ethical foresight will determine whether genetic engineering becomes a
tool for progress or a source of division.