In this blog post, we will examine whether the commercialization of human genetic engineering truly represents progress for humanity, and consider the ethical and social issues behind it.
In the near future, will we be able to determine things such as skin color, hair color, eye color, height, face shape, and body type from the moment we are born? In the 1997 movie Gattaca, all of this is possible. The movie is set in a future where “human genetic engineering” is possible, allowing parents to select the genes they want and remove those they don’t want from a fertilized egg, so that their children inherit only the traits they desire. In other words, parents can determine not only their children’s physical appearance, but also their personality, intelligence, and even their health. It is clear that this technology is extremely attractive, as it guarantees attractive appearance, desirable personality, high intelligence, and good health from birth. Many people have probably imagined what it would be like if this future became a reality. However, if the setting of the movie really became a reality, I can say with certainty that the society of the future would not be the ideal world we imagine.
In fact, this opinion is already reflected in the movie. The main character of Gattaca, Vincent, dreams of becoming an astronaut. However, society does not allow Vincent, who was born with inferior genes, to fulfill his dream. No matter how hard he tries, his dream is blocked by the genetic barrier that he cannot overcome. Vincent makes an extreme choice: to disguise himself as someone else. Jerome Morrow, who was born with superior genes through genetic engineering, sells his DNA to Vincent after an accident renders his genes useless. Vincent disguises himself as Jerome Morrow and strives to achieve his dream of becoming an astronaut. The movie ends with Vincent boarding a spaceship bound for Saturn. How does this movie depict the negative aspects of a future society where human genetic engineering has become commonplace? As viewers of the movie know, the people are very rigid and bureaucratic, and the setting of the movie is also depicted as very bleak. Against this backdrop, Gattaca focuses on showing that genetic engineering can lead to “new discrimination.”
However, the movie can only capture a fragment of society, not the whole society, and similarly, the “new discrimination” depicted in the movie Gattaca is only one of the many problems that human genetic engineering can bring. This means that there are many other problems besides the creation of a culture of discrimination. In this argument, I will present various problems that may arise from the commercialization of genetic engineering, including the problem of new discrimination, and argue that genetic engineering should not be commercialized. First, I will present the problems of ecological disruption and the destruction of human dignity that may arise in the process of commercializing genetic engineering. Next, we will discuss the intensification of the gap between the rich and the poor due to new discrimination and the creation of a new class system that may arise after the commercialization of genetic engineering. Then, we will examine the arguments of those who support the commercialization of genetic engineering and what they overlook.
First, let us look at the problems involved in the process of commercializing genetic engineering. It often takes countless research and trial and error to perfect and stabilize a technology before it can be commercialized, and genetic engineering is no exception. Among the numerous studies conducted to commercialize genetic engineering technology, experiments are conducted on various living organisms, including laboratory mice, and since these experiments are conducted on genes, various types of mutations will occur. But what if some of these mutations escape the laboratory and enter the ecosystem? Of course, this may not happen, but there is a clear possibility that they could have a negative impact on the ecosystem, causing disruption. In fact, the collapse of ecosystem systems due to the introduction of alien species is already happening in many ecosystems.
And although experiments will be conducted on other living organisms in the early stages of the experiment, clinical trials on humans, who are the ultimate target of this technology, will inevitably have to be conducted in the final stages of the experiment. However, isn’t it unethical to use human sperm, eggs, and fertilized eggs in experiments? The question of whether sperm, eggs, or fertilized eggs can be considered “human” or have dignity in and of themselves remains unresolved, with various opinions continuing to clash. However, sperm, eggs, and fertilized eggs are clearly the starting point of life and must be treated with care. In fact, when Dr. Hwang Woo-suk received egg donations for embryonic stem cell research, various issues were raised, and the same issues will arise when research on human genetic engineering begins.
And if “technology that allows everything about a human being to be determined by another human being” becomes commercially available, will human dignity be preserved? Human dignity is the value that humans have from birth, meaning that humans have value simply because they are human, and they must be respected and have values that cannot be replaced by others and rights that cannot be transferred. If human genetic manipulation becomes possible, people will be judged by their genes rather than as human beings, as in the movie. Can human dignity, which is the value of existence simply because we are human beings, be protected in a society that does not see humans as humans? Furthermore, if we are able to choose and manipulate everything about a life as we please, will the dignity of life be protected? If we believe that life has value and should be respected simply because it exists, and if we want to protect that dignity, then I believe that no other entity should interfere in the process of life creation. This is because once we begin to question whether humans created by humans have the same dignity as other humans, the very framework of our values regarding human dignity will be shaken.
Even if human genetic engineering technology is commercialized through such a complex research process, problems will remain. Problems that may arise after the commercialization of genetic engineering include the deepening of the gap between the rich and the poor and the creation of a new class of people. Is it possible to apply the process of selectively preserving only superior genes through artificial insemination fairly to all fetuses around the world? This is an important task that determines the future of a human being, and at the same time, it requires a high degree of precision to replace or remove only the desired genes on the chromosomes without damaging other genes. Even if genetic engineering becomes possible, the price of this technology will likely be quite high, and ultimately, only the upper class (or at least the middle class and above) will be able to benefit from it. This is where the problem arises. In such a situation, children born to the upper class through genetic engineering will be born with only superior genes, but most other children will be born through natural conception and will have genes that are inferior to those of the upper class. It is easy to predict that children born through genetic engineering with only superior genes will be more likely to succeed socially than children born through natural conception with a mixture of superior and inferior genes.
In this way, children of the upper class will be born one step closer to success. In other words, money will determine a person’s future by allowing them to buy health, intelligence, appearance, and personality. Ultimately, children from the upper class will have even more opportunities, which will further exacerbate the problem of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer in today’s society. Furthermore, this phenomenon will not stop at the deepening of the gap between the rich and the poor, but will also create a new culture of discrimination, as mentioned above, and even a new social class or caste. Human genetic engineering not only exacerbates the problems of today’s society, but also creates new ones. Can we say with certainty that what humanity will gain from this technology is more valuable than everything we will lose from these social problems?
If so, let’s look at the reasons why people support genetic engineering and whether there are any problems with those reasons. In fact, there are many advantages to commercializing human genetic engineering. Among them, the most frequently mentioned are that it will become easier to treat human diseases and that human evolution will become possible. With the development of genetic engineering technology, it may be possible to treat congenital diseases that cannot be treated with existing medical technology or can only be treated with temporary measures. In fact, there are cases where congenital diseases have been diagnosed and treated using genetic information. If genetic engineering technology is commercialized, it will be possible to remove genes that cause congenital diseases from fertilized eggs, allowing people to live healthy lives without worry. This will reduce medical costs and improve quality of life.
However, the question is whether genetic engineering will be used only for humanitarian purposes, such as protecting human health and improving quality of life. All technology is a double-edged sword. If used well, it will produce good results, but if used poorly, it will naturally produce bad results. Looking back at history, we can see that dangerous science and technology has been misused by humans in the past, leaving considerable pain in the history of mankind. The same is true for human genetic engineering technology. Of course, I do not oppose the advancement of all technology for that reason. However, if the development of that technology affects the survival of humanity, we definitely have the right to oppose it. Moreover, this technology is not just any technology, but technology related to genes, which determine everything about humans. It is impossible to predict what the results will be if this technology is used for purposes other than the happiness of humanity, such as war, but what is clear is that in the end, only unimaginable devastation will remain.
Another reason why people support the commercialization of genetic engineering is that if genetic engineering leads to the birth of many people with superior genes, a new human race will emerge and society will become more advanced. This is a valid point. Evolutionary biologists also argue that the evolution of humankind has stopped. Evolution is a phenomenon that occurs when the law of survival of the fittest applies, whereby individuals with genes that are advantageous for survival survive, and individuals with genes that are disadvantageous for survival are eliminated. When individuals with genetic information that is disadvantageous for survival disappear and we look at the genes of the group that has survived, we find that most of the genetic information that is disadvantageous or unnecessary for survival has been eliminated, and only genetic information that is advantageous for survival remains. Scholars explain that evolution is when changes in the genetic information of an entire species occur in a specific direction, resulting in differences from the genetic information of existing species. They argue that evolution has stopped because humans are not currently facing survival issues and therefore the law of survival of the fittest does not apply.
However, let’s imagine that human genetic engineering technology becomes commercially available and artificial changes are made to human genetic information. When changes appear in the genetic information of many humans, the overall genetic makeup of humanity will become slightly better. In other words, significant changes in the genetic information of the entire species would occur in a specific direction. In this situation, if enough time passes and the changed genetic information becomes different from the existing genetic information of humanity, evolution will occur. In other words, it is clearly possible to evolve humans through genetic engineering.
However, is evolution really necessary for humanity at this point? My answer is “no.” Evolution is a phenomenon that occurs when a species faces the threat of extinction. In other words, if there is no threat to the survival of the species, then evolution is not necessary. Humans have undergone the agricultural revolution, the industrial revolution, and the information revolution, gradually acquiring advanced technology and improving their quality of life. And the new humans, who will inherit only the best genes of existing humans, may develop technology at a rapid pace and create a world that is much more comfortable and capable than the one we live in today. If so, is it certain that our future lives will be happier than our current lives? In fact, just a decade ago, we lived without mobile phones without any major inconveniences, but now we have become so accustomed to mobile phones that we feel extremely uncomfortable without them. Although our quality of life has improved compared to a decade ago, we are not convinced that our current lives are better than those of the past. Technological advances provide convenience and a higher quality of life, but they do not provide happiness itself. If so, all we can gain from more advanced technology is a little convenience. Must humans evolve while taking great risks for this little convenience?
The movie begins with a quote from Ecclesiastes 7:13: “See the work of God: Who has made the things that are not, that He should call them by name? He forms the circle of the earth, and there is not one hook in it.” In other words, whatever is crooked has its own meaning, and that is why it is crooked. In other words, no matter how humans are born, they have meaning and value just as they are. Having value means having something that is different from others. In a society standardized by genetic engineering, it may be impossible to find any value or identity. Rather than spending time researching human genetic engineering technology while taking enormous risks, I think it would be much better to be satisfied with the present and spend time finding our own value as human beings.
