Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Yet the argument for germ line therapy is seductive. If we can prevent
future generations from suffering inheritable genetic diseases such as
Huntington's Chorea, or Tay-Sachs, or even diabetes, why not? These
are clear diseases; they are fatal or debilitating, and expensive to treat;
they seem to be prime targets for advances in genetic medicine. This leads
to an interesting slippery slope, or perhaps an invitation to the obvious:
in essence, germ line therapy is eugenics, at least in the sense that we
would be improving the germ line by knocking out manifestly undesir-
able genetic traits. If germ line therapy is acceptable, perhaps genetic
enhancement should be as well. Both involve genetic engineering, the dis-
cernment of desirable genetic makeups, and a certain control over future
generations. Is our understanding of disease and health so clear that we
are confident in rejecting the pursuit of advantages and accepting only
the avoidance of potential catastrophes?
One reading of this slippery slope is that however reasonable the argu-
ment against genetic enhancement might sound to sympathetic ears, it is
inadequate, and when the case against genetic enhancement rests on this
alone, it will eventually crumble. In the crunch of daily survival and
immediate possibilities, arguments rooted in our obligations to the
future, especially when couched in terms of a cautious ignorance, have
not been observed in practice as carefully as their proponents would
want; for example, concerns about the environment or the future of
diverse cultures are often voiced and seldom heeded.
Metaphysics as a Prolegomenon to Genetic Enhancement
If an effective (or at least more enlightening) case against genetic engi-
neering can be made, it will be made on grounds that have immediate
bearing on those drawn to the enterprise. My purpose in this chapter is
to suggest that the appropriate ground for the argument is the idea of
personhood and a particular understanding of personhood.
For such an argument, certain issues must be clarified. While the
notion of personhood is an ethical concern, it must also have meta-
physical roots. If genetic engineering gives rise to concerns that go
beyond an evaluation of the consequences of an action or the political
understanding of it, then it is because such a practice would be an alter-
ation of the metaphysical nature of the human being. Thus, if there are
