Cover Image: November 2007 Scientific American Magazine See Inside

Reviews















Share on Tumblr

THE CASE AGAINST PERFECTION: ETHICS IN THE AGE OF GENETIC ENGINEERING
by Michael J. Sandel. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007

ENHANCING EVOLUTION: THE ETHICAL CASE FOR MAKING BETTER PEOPLE
by John Harris. Princeton University Press, 2007

Few books could present more implacably opposed views, and few could raise more provocative questions. Michael J. Sandel, a professor of government at Harvard University and a former member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, assumes that many people find the more extreme forms of genetic engineering (cloning and designer children, for example) disquieting, and he attempts to explain why this unease makes moral sense. John Harris, a professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester School of Law and a member of Britain’s Human Genetics Commission, assumes not only that biotechnological enhancement is going to happen but that we have a moral obligation to make it happen. “I propose,” Harris writes, “both the wisdom and the necessity of intervening in what has been called the natural lottery of life, to improve things by taking control of evolution and our future development to the point, and indeed beyond the point, where we humans will have changed, perhaps into a new and certainly into a better species altogether.”

Sandel argues that the drive to enhance human nature through genetic technologies is objectionable because it represents a bid for mastery that fails to acknowledge that human powers are a gift (whether from nature, God or fortune). If biotechnology dissolved our sense of giftedness, he continues, we would lose three key features of our moral landscape—humility, responsibility and solidarity. “Rather than employ our new genetic powers to straighten ‘the crooked timber of humanity,’” he writes, “we should do what we can to create social and political arrangements more hospitable to the gifts and limitations of imperfect human beings.”

One is the more eloquent—and even at times uplifting—argument. The other is no doubt the way the world is going to go.



Subscribe     Buy This Issue

Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.

Comments

Add Comment
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Reviews: Scientific American Magazine

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X