Human Genetic Advancement and the Future Destruction of

Today’s Concept of Man

In the background […], one hears

of martial condemnations of the

Lebensunwertigenleben:

the life unworthy of living.

–Bernard Haring on his book, The Ethics of Manipulation

An Argumentative Research Paper

By

Robert Leonard C. Goco

In partial fulfilment of

English 12 – s05

Ateneo de Manila University sy 09-10

1

Imagine our country at least 50 years into the future. You wake up to the noise outside caused by

road repairs done by men with ripped bodies. You open the TV and you see men who are probably suffering

hydrocephalus, engaging in some sort of argument about mass-producing human organs for transplant. Your

160 year old rich neighbour is being accompanied across his lawn by his younger clone. You might think of it

as bizarre and for some, fascinating. But lo and behold, this might be the future of genetics, the science that

seeks to understand heredity and variation. You might be wondering, what on earth could be wrong with

that awesome imagery of tomorrow? It may well be the same things that make it incredibly interesting.

Since its discovery, genetics has been widely studied for its possibilities in improving lives. For

example, the application of genetics through Agriculture the world has come to know plants with improved

shelf life, produce vitamins they don’t usually do1 and even generate their own pesticides2. Animals are no

exception. A famous example of genetically modified animal is the pet GloFish3. These are fish that were

inserted with genes from a fluorescent jellyfish, which gives them the ability to glow. Probably the most

important of all genetic marvels are the advancements in medical genetics. These includes procedures like

gene therapy and chromosome related disease research that helped scientists provide necessary cures and

preventions to inheritable diseases like Down syndrome, Huntington disease and even cancer.4

Genetics has many disciplines, one of which is Human genetics: the study of inheritance as it occurs

in human beings, and as well as its applications. Humans, being the focus of every scientific study, has been

extensively but carefully studied by scientists. Human genetics has come a long way from its initial studies

about diseases in families to the recent Human Genome Project. It is a powerful branch of science because

of its ability to manipulate our species through various genetic technologies, but as much as it is acclaimed; it

receives the same amount of criticism from ethics groups, religious groups and scientists alike.

1 e.g. Golden Rice. Rice which is modified to express genes that code for Vitamin A production. See figure 1.1. (appendix)2 e.g. Bt Corn. Corn plants infused with genes that code toxins from Bacillus thuringiensis, a soil dwelling bacterium.3 See figure 1.24 There are a lot more examples of genetics’ contributions to mankind but they are too many to be enumerated in this paper.

2

Genetics started from a pea garden of Gregor Mendel. He studied patterns of inheritance in the

offspring of each generation and thus established the foundations of genetics. Next would be Charles

Darwin, whose voyage in the Galapagos, proposed the theory of natural selection. Natural selection is the

process in which heritable traits that helps an organism to survive and successfully reproduce; a certain

organism’s traits, become common in over successive generations. Through these fundamental ideas, some

intellectuals formulated the idea of eugenics: the study and practice of selective breeding applied to humans,

with the aim of improving the species. People didn’t see anything wrong with the idea and was actually a

rave in the 20th century, until it was attributed to the horrors of genocide of Nazi Germany during World War

II.5 This is one of the cases in which science was used against mankind.6

Science has never been an answer to every problem. Every now and then, something new is

discovered and somehow, the ideas were laid to wrong hands. What was supposed to help mankind was

turned against him. This is obvious in weapon research and engineering. However, the same goes for

human genetics. A few people realize the possible opportunities that could arise if it is thoroughly studied.

Religious groups condemn almost every genetic discovery due to their beliefs on man’s restrictions on

manipulating our species.7 Some scientists even argue the possible dangers in manipulating the gene pool.

Ethics Group fear that the humanity of man will degrade through genetic advancement. Arguments in this

field range from the simple irrational, like the preservation of the human erotic experience8; to the deeply

philosophical, the dehumanization of man9. Is finding for a cure worth the chaos it may possibly generate?

5 Black, Edwin. War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race. n.d. p 240. In addition to being practiced in a number of countries, it was internationally organized through the International Federation of Eugenic Organization. 6 Eugenics has rarely been associated with the evolution of the science of genetics. Very few people realize (or are even aware of) the impact of this era in genetics because educational writers emphasize only the good things that genetics has provided.7 Nelson, Robert J. On the New Frontiers of Genetics and Religion. (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company). 1994. p171: Official Religious Positions. 1994.8 This is actually my own personal idea. This argument, although quite odd, is nonetheless true given that future children will simply be created in test tubes instead of actually made.9 Habermas, Jurgen. The Future of Human Nature. (Cambridge : Polity Press). 2003. p60. Habermas is one of the leading ethicist critics of genetic advancement. His works, although not all cited in this academic paper, has been inspiration and reference to some of the arguments stated in this paper.

3

Cloning, one of the applications of genetics, is probably the most infamous, as it is used extensively

in popular sci-fi media10. As of today, all forms of Human Cloning, as stated by The UN Declaration on Human

Cloning, are currently prohibited due to ethical issues on dehumanizing the human species. Human Cloning

was already tried on 50 human embryos by scientists in George Washington University back in 1993.

However, their research was terminated after six days of experimentation due to ethical issues.11 Human

Cloning was already backed-up with numerous studies. Furthermore, the technology for its implementation

is not at all expensive nor far-off to the future. It might be possible in the next few years or possibly been

done successfully in top secret.12

The most obvious ethical issue against human cloning is the dehumanization of the human race.

From it, man will now might come to know a different form of himself; a copy of himself devoid of its original

content.13 In popular culture, one of the concerns on Human Cloning includes new form of identity crisis,

along with several other problems on the authenticity (possibly due to cloning without due consent).

Another reason for its infamy is the possibility that it might give rise to a capitalist practice of “human

farming” or the mass cloning and farming of human beings for harvesting healthy organs to be used in

therapy or transplant.14 Human Cloning is also not cost-effective due to problems concerning its success.

Dolly the sheep15, the first mammal to be successfully cloned, took 800 attempts. It was proven that there is

10 E.g. Sixth Day (see fig. 3.1), Ressurection of Zachary Wheeler, Star Wars: Attack of the Clones (see fig. 3.2), Multiplicity11 Schwartz, John. Cloning Experiments Violated GWU Policies. The Washington Post. December 7, 1994. n. pag.12 Eigen, Lewis D. Human Clones May Be Among Us Now! Who Is Ready?. Scriptamus. 2010. Accessed 25, Jan 2010. Available

from: < http://scriptamus.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/human-clones-may-be-among-us-now-who-is-ready/>

13 a.k.a. simulacrum.14 Schmidt, Peter. Headless Clones and HMOs: A Modest Proposal on the Future of Human Organ Farming, With an Addendum

on Educational Reform. Swarthmore College. 2009.

15 See fig. 4.1

4

a low chance for an embryo to actually be produced16 and furthermore, the offspring of cloning is still subject

to genetic defects such as shorter life spans, diseases and sterility. 17

Another controversy under human genetics is Genetic Enhancement. Genetic Enhancement is

the modification and improvement of a person’s non-pathological human traits with the use of genetic

engineering. Genetic Enhancement can be likened to pimping yourself with various additions to your or your

offspring’s gene structure. Today, genes that code for certain natural performance-enhancing hormones18

can easily be incorporated in an embryo’s genetic makeup, and still, the possibilities for “add-ons” are

significantly many.

Genetic Enhancement raises an alarm to the creation of an unfair advantage and a violation in the

principles of Human Equality through the creation of a “Sub-Human”, a new breed of artificially perfect

human being.19 The possibility of creating a “perfect human being” with increased intelligence and strength

will be the norm of the future, therefore making more people identical to each other. That being said, it will

decrease variation in the gene pool and eventually cause degradation in human evolution. Furthermore,

more degenerate mutants carrying novel genetic diseases will occur in a population. How is that any good in

“improving our species”?

Genetic Enhancement will also dehumanize mankind through the destruction of the randomness of

our traits.20 With the choice of what we want to be, we will be “playing God”.21 According to C.S. Lewis, “…

16 Weiss, Rick. Human cloning's 'Numbers Game'. Washington Post. 2000. October 10, 2000

17 What are the Risks of Cloning? Human Genome Project Information. Genomic Science Program. 2009. Accessed 25 Jan 2010. Available from : <http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml>

18 e.g. growth hormones and hormones that code for thicker blood, hence making people have better stamina19 B., Phil. 2006. Reasons for and Against Human Cloning. Phil for Humanity. Accessed Jan 25, 2010. Available from:

<http://www.philforhumanity.com/Human_Cloning.html>. The term Sub-Human is my own invention, though.

20 This is only one of the many things ethicist point out about dehumanization due to genetic advancement. This argument and the succeeding one however, is the most scientific and rational for me.21 Hanna, Kathi E. Genetic Enhancement. National Human Genome Research Institute. 2006. Accessed 25 Jan 2010. Available

from < http://www.genome.gov/10004767>

5

if any one age really attains, by eugenics and scientific manipulation, the power to make the descendant

what it pleases, all men who live after it are patients of that power. They are weaker, not stronger”.22

Ultimately, Human manipulation is a question of freedom. Is the freedom in unlocking the potentials of

offspring; to allow future humans to be exceptionally adept in various fields; worth the freedom in

becoming who you are meant to be in the “natural lottery of life”, whose life is not determined by

choice of predecessors? Certainly not; we are the only ones to determine which path we will take in life.

Should we proceed with the mentality of thanatos23, to live with diseases that humans experience and

eventually die, or should man meddle with his children in their most vulnerable form: the embryo? We

may, but at the expense of destroying the very reason of the existence of our future children: to become

human.

Genetics has also helped in the advancement of medicine in terms of the production of new

drugs and research on genetically linked diseases. The mapping of the Human Genome make way for the

deletion or manipulation of genes that encode for genetic diseases like Alzheimer’s disease, Cancer, Down

Syndrome, etc. Through which, the trend of mankind will be towards more years of living because of the less

complications that he might suffer during his lifetime. Eventually, longer lifespans, if not immortality, can

actually be attained.

Immortality and longer lifespans do not assure that the person will still be able to live a completely

healthy lifestyle since the body still degrades. Because of this, the world will experience an increase in the

non-working age-group (75-above). It will then bring a lot of economic problems in the form of costly

government pensions and maintenance catering to the elderly.24 In like manner, the possible population

22 An excerpt from Lewis, C.S.’s book, The Abolition of Man. (1943: Chapter 3, n. pag.) In this book which he made for “teaching upper english”, he defends science as something worth pursuing it but criticizes using it to debunk values or defining it to exclude values.23 i.e. in the Freudian psychoanalytic theory, the human drive towards death or dying (in emphasis that we are not afraid to die).24 Adams, Ernest W. Some Practical Problems with Immortality. Game Developers’ Conference Roadtrip. South San Francisco,

California. 1998. November 22, 1998.

6

increase will cause great pressure to our environment due to the increase in demand of natural resources,

increase in pollution, and destruction of forests (to compensate for the demand of living space).

Also, as exemplified by various sci-fi movies, humans may be able to establish “Pseudo-immortality”

through cloning. Wealthy people who are capable of funding for a clone live on through their genetically

identical copies. Again, this issue is in the question of fearing death. People aspire of longevity and scorn in

the thought of dying, thus, they find cures for diseases that bring us closer to the reaper. It is human to fear

death but denying it for the longest time will once again be destroying the whole concept of a person’s being.

Eugenics, which was initially defined as the study of all agencies under human control which can

improve or impair the racial quality of future generation 25, has evolved its definition into the elimination of

genetic diseases, increase of intelligence, and reduction of personality disorders26 since its usage by Nazi

Germany as a propaganda in genocide back in WWII.27 The reformed eugenics, unlike the inhumane

practices of the 20th century such as forced euthanasia and sterilization, now concerns prenatal diagnosis of

embryos with genetic diseases, embryo selection, and cloning.28 In layman’s terms, Informal eugenics works

through a strict choosing of an appropriate mate with high standards (high IQ, disease-free, physically fit).

When applied, it is not too different from the discrimination of the old eugenics because people below

standards will be avoided, secluded from society, end up not having offspring and maybe eventually end up

disappearing from the gene pool. No one should suffer for the sake of everybody else without at least his

consent. In that thinking, if a degenerate person thinks he is a menace to mankind, he could kill himself

(which would obviously be inappropriate) or, at least, would remain a virgin throughout his life.

25 Galton, Francis. Hereditary Genius: an Inquiry Into Its Laws and Consequences. (London: Macmillian’s Magazine). 1869. n. pag.

26 Lynn, Richard. Eugenics: A Reassesment. (Northern Ireland: Praeger Publishers. University of Ulster). 2001. n.pag.

27 See fig. 6.128 Lynn. n.pag.

7

Furthermore, eugenics in the form of prenatal diagnosis is under the heat of bioethics since it

questions the value of mentally and physically disabled people. Aside from that, a lot of conservatives fear

that it is a new angle to allow therapeutic abortion. Prevention of illness is the highest ideal of medicine

and in saying so, the genetics term of prevention is the selective breeding of genetically affected infants

by people who, as it is said, “pollute the gene pool”.29 Prenatal diagnosis also receives criticism due to

inappropriate counsellors who apparently “urge” and “hurry” parents to abort a genetically impaired

embryo.30 Eugenics, whichever way taken, is the “self-direction of human evolution”31 and it still poses

ethical, philosophical and religious issues about the boundaries on which mankind should meddle with the

natural process of mankind.

The problem with people who support genetics is that they only see the light at the end of the

tunnel; overlooking all the demons that lurk inside. They are blinded by the shimmering splendour that

genetic advancement has to offer. In the dawn of a new species of mankind, discrimination will spawn which

will then cause wars32; wars unlike any other before. Conflicts that may arise can annihilate whole races

driven with the fallacious rationale that they are “genetically unfit” and therefore should be eliminated “for

the good of mankind”. This has not been the first time such words were spoken33. Artificially purifying

mankind will indeed rid mankind of the menace of diseases, but it is also obviously a short-sighted, selfish,

and inhumane deed.

According to James D. Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA and one of the people who

helped establish the Human Genome Project, “Once you have a way in which you can improve our children,

29 Haring, Bernard. Ethics of Manipulation: Issues in Medicine, Behaviour Control, and Genetics. (New York: The Seaburry Press). 1975. pp. 159-202

30 Nelson, Robert J. On the New Frontiers of Genetics and Religion. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1994. p15331 Taken from the tagline of the 2nd International Eugenics Conference of 192132 Once again, this can be exemplified by Nazi Germany and Jews.33 Nazi Germany, as stated in the previous topic on eugenics, has extensively used eugenics as a movement to eliminate enemies and the genetically diseased

8

no one can stop it”.34 That being said, it is irrevocable for mankind to experience a paradigm shift of great

impact in the acceptance of a new breed of our species that is totally different from before. Of course,

paradigm shifts are inevitable. We have come past a lot35 and fortunately, we are still holding strong against

the winds of change. But a change given by our own desires to manipulate our species is not only dangerous,

but also ultimately crippling the natural process which has been good enough to preserve life in our planet

for billions of years. Billions of years! Surely that is more than enough proof to argue how effective it is.

Radical conservatism, you may debate, but unlike most matters where conservatism is the issue, one wrong

step here may deliberately cause the extinction of mankind.

Human genetics may cure millions, improve our species in all aspects by a hundredfold and reassess

the understanding of our beliefs and our species but it may also cause as much chaos as it can improve lives.

Commercialization of genetic research is both disturbing and inescapable. New discrimination laws will

be passed.36 Life span increase will cause overpopulation which will then cause a domino effect of problems

possibly leading to laws on life span limits. Another division of mankind will be invented for the genetically

improved society, Clones, Genetically Modified and Normal Human. Our understanding of our species will be

shattered once more; our spiritual belief, seen in a new light. Human Genetics, as a whole, is obviously not at

all bad, but very few people realize that these new innovations, just like every milestone, can bring an

inevitable, massive, and possibly negative change. The big question is: are we ready for it?

34 An excerpt from James D. Watson’s speech regarding the Human Genome Project.35 Most of the considered paradigm shifts came with the discovery of new knowledge (e.g. discovery of the round world, acceptance of equality with slave African-Americans ). The hardest part about such destruction of previously known ideas is the acceptance. One may say that fear should not be a hindrance to the future and we should always brave the unknown, but with genetic advancement, there are concrete reasons why we should not meddle with it. Fear of the future of human genetics (in the case of the arguments in this paper) is not from ignorance of the issue, but from the knowledge of its possible negative effects.36 The discrimination laws in perspective here are between human and sub-humans. There are, however, discrimination laws on genetic discrimination already. This concerns the confidentiality of information about genetic testing (or the proven genetic disease of a certain individual) so that medical insurance companies and job auditions will not be biased.

9

References

Adams, Ernest W. Some Practical Problems with Immortality. Game Developers’ Conference Roadtrip. South San Francisco, California. November 22, 1998.

B., Phil. Reasons for and Against Human Cloning. Phil for Humanity. Accessed Jan 25, 2010. Available from: <http://www.philforhumanity.com/Human_Cloning.html> 2006.

Black, Edwin. War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race. n.d. p240.

Christiansen, Karin. “The silencing of Kierkegaard in Habermas’ critique of genetic enhancement”. Med Health Care and Philos. vol. 12 (2009) p147–156.

Eigen, Lewis D. Human Clones May Be Among Us Now! Who Is Ready?. Scriptamus. 2010. Accessed 25, Jan 2010. Available from: < http://scriptamus.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/human-clones-may-be-among-us-now-who-is-ready/>

Farber, Steven. U.S. Scientists’ Role in the Eugenics Movement (1907–1939):A Contemporary Biologist’s Perspective. ZEBRAFISH. Volume 5 (2008) p244-245.

Galton, Francis. Hereditary Genius: an Inquiry Into Its Laws and Consequences. (London: Macmillian’s Magazine.) 1869.

Habermas, Jurgen. The Future of Human Nature. (Cambridge : Polity Press). 2003. p60.

Hanna, Kathi E. Genetic Enhancement. National Human Genome Research Institute. 2006. Accessed 25 Jan 2010. Available from < http://www.genome.gov/10004767>

Haring, Bernard. Ethics of Manipulation: Issues in Medicine, Behaviour Control, and Genetics. (New York: The Seaburry Press). 1975. pp. 159-202

Kakuk , Pe´ter. 2008. Gene Concepts and Genethics: Beyond Exceptionalism. Sci Eng Ethics 14:357–375Kin, Curtis A. 1996. “Coming Soon to a “Genetic Supermarket” Near You”. Stanford Law Review. Vol. 48, No. 6 (Jul., 1996), pp. 1573-

1604

Lemka, Thomas. “Genetic Testing, Eugenics, and Risk”. Critical Public Health,Vol. 12, No. 3, (2002) p284-290Lynn, Richard.. Eugenics: A Reassesment. (Northern Ireland: Praeger Publishers. University of Ulster). 2001.

Nelson, Robert J. On the New Frontiers of Genetics and Religion. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1994. p171: Official Religious Positions.

Rostand, Jean. Can Man be Modified? (New York: Basic Books, Inc). 1959. p75Schmidt, Peter. Headless Clones and HMOs: A Modest Proposal on the Future of Human Organ Farming,With an Addendum on

Educational Reform. Very Large Array. Swarthmore CollegeSwarthmore PA. 2009. Accessed 25, Jan 2010. Available from: <http://www.swarthmore.edu/Humanities/pschmid1/array/Gnarl3/organs.html>

Schwartz, John. Cloning Experiments Violated GWU Policies. The Washington Post. December 7, 1994. n. pag.Smith, Anthony. The Human Pedigree. (New York: McGraw Hill Book Company). 1975.

Stone, Dan. Breeding Superman: Nietzsche, Race and Eugenics in Edwardian and Interwar Britain. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. University of Liverpool. n.d. p115

Twine, Richard. “Thinking across species—a critical bioethics approach to enhancement”. Springer Science+Business Media : Theor Med Bioeth No. 28 (2007) pp. 509–523

Weiss, Rick. 2000. Human cloning's 'Numbers Game'. Washington Post. October 10, 2000. n. pag.

What are the Risks of Cloning? Human Genome Project Information. Genomic Science Program. 2009. Accessed 25 Jan 2010. Available from : <http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml>

10

Appendix

Figure 1.1: Normal white rice (right) and golden rice (left) Figure 1.2: Normal zebrafish (above) and GloFish (below)

Figure 3.1: The 6th Day starring Arnold Scwarzenneger as Adam, a man who uncovers a global conspiracy of clones taking over the world

Figure 3.2: Scene from Star Wars: Attack of the Clones depicting thousands of clones.

Figure 4.1: Dolly the Sheep, the first mammal to be cloned. Figure 6.1: German Eugenic Propaganda Poster. English translation: “60000 RM: This is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the Community of Germans during his lifetime. Fellow Citizen, that is your money, too”

11

12