Arguments Against Genetic Engineering

Genetic engineering, or genetic modification, is the process of manually adding new DNA to an organism in order to improve or develop certain traits in that organism. Over the past 100 years, people’s views have changed from rejection and denial, to complete acceptance of this process. At first, transplanting genes from one organism to another seemed like an immoral, unnecessary and a disruption in nature’s work – along with the many unavoidable risks. However, as technology advanced, people began to view genetic engineering in a new light, and slowly began to recognize the benefits that came along with it. In regards to whether or not genetic engineering is ethical, Utilitarianism and Deontological viewpoints differ to a great extent, as

Although some may argue that Bentham and Kant have similar views on the issue of genetic engineering, such as putting human lives above animal lives, Bentham and Kant in actuality make compelling – albeit opposite – arguments, especially when it comes to the motives, the processes and consequences of genetic engineering.

Bentham and Kant have one major common agreement, which is that they put the lives of human as priority and above any other life. Both Bentham and Kant place a huge value on human life above others. Bentham is a hedonist utilitarian meaning that he argues that pleasure is the central intrinsic good. Thus, a hedonist strives to maximize pleasure over pain for all humans. In his book An Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation, Bentham asks the question “The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But can they suffer? (Bentham) in order to classify what can be analyzed through the hedonic calculus. Since all humans suffer, human life is immediately placed at a high value and through