Your main homework is to complete a draft of your essay on Gattaca and The Case Against Perfection. You may also use Tomorrow's Children if you wish. You have instructions but I will also paste them in below. Be sure to send the essay to yourself so you can open it in the lab on Monday.
Your second assignment is to read chapters 1-5 of The Office of Mercy, our new science fiction novel in which Americans are immortal. You will like it. I distributed this FREE novel in class. If you missed class you can catch up on Monday.
You will have lab time to ask questions about the essay and refine your ideas.
Assignment: After watching Gattaca and reading Sandel’s
chapter on “Designer Children, Designing Parents,” discuss the benefits and
dangers of genetic selection. What are the advantages and disadvantages
of having a child’s genes selected? Would you want selection for certain traits but not others? Why or why not? What is gained by genetic selection? What is lost? What role does individual
freedom or chance play in this debate?
What would you want for yourself? What would you recommend for others?
Here is a sample outline:
Introduction: define genetic selection based on your reading of Sandel (and other sources if you wish)
Body 1: The benefits for society, for individuals as portrayed in Gattaca
Body 2: The dangers for society, for individuals as portrayed in Gattaca and discussed in The Case Against Perfection
Conclusion: your position based on our discussions and the readings. What would you want, recommend?
Your essay should be 400-600 words and you
should refer directly to the film and the reading. Your essay should be typed, double-spaced,
have a heading, title and documentation we will review in class.
Use MLA format for documentation as discussed in class. I gave you Works Cited for Gattaca, The Case Against Perfection and Tomorrow's Children in the handout.
The movie “Gattaca” and “The Case against Perfection” by Michael J. Sandel has been a prime source to acquaint us with this theory of artificially modified gene enhancement. This topic often creates more questions than answers. It’s a tough decision, to become “designer parents”, can it be beneficial? Or is it going to be harmful? Is there advantages? Or is it dangerous? There is a fine line between enhancements and cures. If the parents have defected genes wouldn’t it make sense to go through the process of gene enhancement, so that their child can live a normal, disease-free life. What about choosing gene enhancement, for making the child superior to the average child? There are always two sides to everything and parents tend to have to make the toughest decision for their kids. Hopefully, we can determine with certainty what’s right and what’s wrong? Thus, where to draw that fine line of accepting and neglecting, this scientific method within the society.
ReplyDeleteI find that the film and the book both mentioned many pros and cons. Some positive aspects to being genetically enhanced are being born disease free, above average in academics or in sports, having the physical traits desired by parents such as different eye color and being taller in height. Some disadvantages presented with gene enhancements were examples like objectifying kids, societal status in everyday life, god’s creation and his natural plan being obstructed, creating hierarchy and losing freedom of choice as adults because parents would be more involved in their heirs’ life. Already we see that parents choose from an early age, enhancements for their kids such as, giving them a tennis racket or handing them a golf club to get a head start at the sport or sending the kids to SAT classes to prepare them for the SAT test which will get them into schools with far superior education. All these components are respectable and within the norms of society and achievable without any gene selection modifications. Going through the process of gene selection as normal kids would only turn them into bionic athletes and no competition would be present for them. What about cures though, kids with disorders mentally and physically should be able to live a normal life. In the book, Sandel talks about not being able to choose your child as you would choose your child but loving and accepting kids the way they are, so that there disease wouldn’t be a disease if it made them stronger or better human beings.
The film portrayed the same components as the book in a paradoxical way; the pros and cons of society, the question of evolution in the future being inevitable. The only difference was how Vincent, a god-child, a borrowed ladder, in the society of overachieving genetically enhanced super-humans, manipulated Jerome’s genetically enhanced life to conquer his dream of going into space. Since Vincent was a natural-born and believed to live a short life he was neglected. He fought that misconception and worked hard to stay on top of the “gifted”. I commend Vincent’s actions for being the ‘underdog’ and achieving his dream. I really think that if you have a desire in the world to do something or be something as long as you believe it’s morally right and it’s what you want you should do whatever it takes. Although, I don’t agree to the social divisions, genetic screening creates. I’m all for genetic enhancement as long as it’s to cure for the benefit of the human being. I know I would appreciate it if there was a way to be normal, I was going to be born with defection. Thus I am somewhat worried about people using it to become superior to the human race.
Work cited :
• Gattaca, Dir, Andrew Nichol. Perf. Ethan Hawk and Uma Thurman. Columbia Pictures. 1997
• Sandel, Micheal J. The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. Cambridge and London: Belknap, 2007
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete