In this blog post, we’ll examine the social changes that “custom-made” humans might bring about in a competitive society, along with their limitations, and consider together how genetic selection technology might affect human happiness.
In the past, as far back as the grandmothers’ and mothers’ generations in South Korea, when a woman became pregnant, she didn’t know what characteristics her child would have—or even its gender—until after birth. However, today, with advances in technologies such as ultrasound, chromosomal testing, and genetic testing, it has become possible to determine not only the fetus’s sex but also the presence of certain genetic disorders, chromosomal abnormalities, and infections before birth. The movie ‘Gattaca’ takes this a step further, depicting a society where genes are selected and manipulated starting from the moment sperm and egg are fertilized. Genes that could potentially cause various genetic disorders are eliminated, and even intelligence and physical attributes are intentionally engineered. The film is set in a transitional society where naturally born humans and “designer humans” coexist, and the story unfolds around the discrimination that exists between the two groups.
At first glance, eliminating genes that cause disease or result in physical limitations, and creating “designer humans” with high intelligence, the personality traits desired by their parents, and superior physical abilities seems like a very ideal scenario. It feels as though many people suffering from genetic diseases could be freed from their ailments, and the average capabilities of society as a whole would rise, creating a better world to live in.
But can a society where people are “produced” through genetic selection truly make humanity happier? To cut to the chase, I don’t think so. Of course, there are certainly advantages to genetic selection technology, but I believe those advantages aren’t significant enough to outweigh the disadvantages.
Modern society is often referred to as a “society of endless competition.” There are always limited openings in the professions and fields people desire, and even getting into a desired position does not mean the competition is over. One must constantly compete and survive within that environment just to maintain one’s position.
If an era of “custom-made humans”—where everyone’s abilities are standardized at a high level—were to arrive, competition in society would likely become even fiercer than it is now. Even today, mental health issues among students are consistently raised as a major social problem. One of the causes of this phenomenon is the fierce competition within schools. It is particularly noteworthy that even high-achieving, competitive students experience these difficulties. In some cases, this leads to tragic choices not because of an absolute lack of ability, but because they feel a profound sense of relative inferiority when comparing themselves to others. The fact that tragic news emerges even from universities where outstanding students gather confirms that excessive competition has a negative impact on society.
Returning to the discussion of “custom-made humans,” if such a system were introduced, people’s average abilities would likely increase. However, even in this transformed society, certain professions and fields would still be in high demand, and competition to secure those positions would not disappear. As abilities become more uniform, even the slightest difference could determine success or failure, and the number of people unable to achieve their desired goals could increase. These individuals may feel even greater frustration at the thought, “Even though I was born with such exceptional qualities, there is still someone more talented than me.” This scenario is depicted in the movie ‘Gattaca’. The protagonist, Jerome, was a human born through genetic selection and an outstanding swimmer, but in the end, he could not surpass a competitor who was more talented than him. Ultimately, driven to despair, he attempted to take his own life and was left to live with paraplegia.
While “human” can be defined as a single concept, individual humans may be similar but can never be identical. Alexis Carrel, a natural scientist and philosopher, wrote the following in his book ‘Man, the Unknown’:
“‘Human being’ is a universal and general concept that encompasses all people. It has a different meaning from the individual who acts, loves, suffers, fights, and eventually dies.”
This statement implies that every individual is a unique being. Therefore, even if everyone’s abilities were enhanced, differences between people would still exist. Ultimately, people would once again compare and rank one another using relative standards—though the differences would be much smaller than before. In this regard, I believe that a society of “custom-made humans” with superior physical and intellectual abilities actually poses a greater risk in terms of competition.
In response to this, some might argue, “Competition not only exists in today’s society but is actually more rational in a society of customized humans because everyone competes from the same starting line.” Competition has existed in the past, exists today, and will continue into the future. In a fair and rational society where rewards are proportional to one’s efforts, one might acknowledge the necessity of competition. However, unlike the past when the proverb “A dragon can rise from a muddy pond” held some truth, there are persistent claims that opportunities for fair competition are gradually diminishing in today’s society.
In fact, research findings from both Korea and abroad consistently show that educational opportunities and parents’ socioeconomic backgrounds have a significant impact on children’s academic performance. Given this reality, as competition intensifies, students from more privileged backgrounds are likely to gain an advantage. If “custom-made humans” are introduced in the future, making people’s physical and intellectual abilities largely similar, this phenomenon could become even more pronounced. In a society like ours today, where individual differences in ability still exist, there is a possibility that some individuals will overcome their disadvantaged circumstances through exceptional talent. However, in a society of “customized humans,” even if competition appears fair on the surface, external factors such as family background or economic circumstances may actually exert a greater influence, potentially widening the gap between social classes.
Another counterargument to this is the view that disparities between social classes or unfair competition can be sufficiently mitigated through appropriate government policies and institutional intervention. Furthermore, advocates of “custom-made humans” argue that even if gene-selection technology were introduced, any potential side effects could be largely resolved through government oversight and regulation. However, before claiming that such problems can be solved through government control, it is necessary to first examine how effectively various issues in today’s society are actually being managed.
As competition among students has intensified and the private tutoring market has expanded over a long period, the South Korean government has consistently revised its education policies. It has adjusted exam subjects, overhauled the college admissions system, and changed assessment methods on multiple occasions. However, despite these policy changes, the issues of educational competition and private tutoring have not been fully resolved and remain significant social challenges. It is also a reality that students from economically well-off families are more likely to experience a better educational environment. While it cannot be definitively stated that such an environment necessarily leads to improved learning ability, it is true that it increases their chances of getting ahead of other students. Given this reality, it is questionable whether it is a reasonable judgment to believe that government regulation alone will be sufficient to address “customized human technology”—which could potentially lead to even greater social problems.
Article 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates that “All citizens shall possess human dignity and value and shall have the right to pursue happiness.” Human dignity is a value that all people must possess equally, regardless of wealth disparity, occupation, or social discrimination. To uphold this human dignity, I believe it is desirable to build a society where individuals place greater importance on the values of cooperation and coexistence rather than competition. It will not be too late to revisit the discussion of “customized human” technology once a sufficient social consensus has been reached that prioritizes cooperation over competition.
Much like the story of Pandora’s box in Greek mythology, this issue is such that once a choice is made, it is difficult to reverse. Furthermore, it is difficult to say that humanity has sufficiently predicted or verified the long-term impact that gene-editing technology will have on society as a whole. Should we open Pandora’s box, or leave it as it is? At this point, it would be a wiser choice to make a careful judgment and continue thorough social discussion rather than hastily opening the box.
