Free genetic engineering Essays and Papers - 123HelpMe
Why the Future Doesn't Need Us | WIRED
The assertion that genetic engineering is wrong because it is unnatural strikes a chord with many people and, I think, encapsulates why they have a gut reaction against the technology. However, it is dismissed by regulators and many philosophers (eg. ), because they fail to examine how 'unnatural' and 'natural' are actually used in the context of technological practices. Instead, they focus on one or both of the two principal meanings of 'nature' given by John Stuart Mill (): nature is "the collective name for everything which is," in which case we cannot do anything that is unnatural; or "it is everything which is of itself, without voluntary human intervention," from which it follows that everything we do in a planned, considered way is unnatural. In contrast to these two meanings people do actually regard some technological products or practices as being more natural than others: organic farming is considered more natural than 'conventional' agriculture; wool, cotton and silk are 'natural' fibres whereas acrylic and polyester are not, and one particular technique for avoiding conception is termed 'natural birth-control' whereas the contraceptive pill would never be called 'natural.' Rather than dismissing such terminology as the product of romantic ignorance, I would like to pay attention to what 'unnatural' and 'natural' mean in these contexts. This I will do by considering the characteristics of the three sets of technologies mentioned above. I will then argue that genetic engineering can be said to be unnatural and put forward three reasons why the unnaturalness of a technology makes it morally suspect.
Genetic Engineering: What is Genetic Engineering?
This essay will discuss the impact of genetic engineering on everyday life, for example genetic disorders, disease and how its impact on life in the world today.