Up@dawn 2.0

Monday, April 3, 2017

Final project : The Case Against Perfection

Blogpost 1:  Part One

Here is Michael Sandel speaking on this book


The conversation started with a couple who decided that they wanted to have a deaf child like them and raise that child to appreciate it. This caused outrage across the world because they were said to have inflicted a child with a disorder that they could not have chosen to have. The controversy lies in is it ethical for them to choose for their child to be deaf or is it unethical for them to design their child. Another couple who has specific standards for their unborn child (5’10, athletic, no medical issues and SAT score of 1400+) was able to receive their perfect embryo without controversy, why? Is deaf not just another quality of life that people live with or is it that when choosing qualities that “enhance” life, so to speak, it is not a problem? The question up for debate is, is it okay for parents to enhance their perfectly healthy child but not okay to make your child accept a lifestyle like being deaf. What’s the comparison between a parent sending their child to the best private school vs a parent shelling out money to enhance their child? There is so much controversy in the concept of this book.
Another aspect of this genetic engineering is the expectation placed on the child. Nothing is guaranteed and even though your child is 6’5 they could not want to play sports at all. When a parent is able to choose the qualities of a child before they are born they place subliminal expectations on that child that could be unattainable. The book explains how children are a gift how they come and should be appreciated as such. That we choose everything else in our lives from our spouses to our friends to our jobs / school but our children is something we can’t control and that is the excitement in life. Not only could expectations be crushed but that child would be pushed towards things that they may or may not like because of what the parents wants inhibiting them to make decisions for themselves. For example, Venus and Serena Williams, thought they are amazing tennis players and world champions, their father planned for this to happen before they were even born, there is a possibility that they could not even have played tennis at all if this wasn’t the case. If genetic engineering becomes a real possibility we have to think about the monetary aspects, how much will these alterations cost? Who will be able to afford them? Will it be fair to offer these advancements to only the rich? What about sports? Is it fair for people who have the advancements to compete with those who don’t? will it raised the standard of athletes? There are so many considerations to take into account that can and will be affected. “The more an athlete relies on a drug or genetic fixes, the less his performance represents his achievement” (Sandel 26) Sports will no longer be about natural talents or hours in the gym but how much money you can shell out to get advancements. There are advancements every day that change the world that could be taken into account as an unfair benefactor, such as the first pair of shoes. Who could afford those?

Image result for case against perfection

is this picture the ultimate goal? Excellence?

1 comment:

  1. This is a great blog and I completely disagree with the couple and think they are being selfish with their actions! I think we truly have to be careful with this genetic engineering phase!