Julian Savulescu illustrates the ethics of genetic enhancements by focusing on a means of helping people, who are naturally limited in life, to live a longer and/or better life than normal through genetic enhancement. First, he offers three arguments in favor of genetically enhancing human beings; those being to choose not to enhance is wrong for our children’s betterment, biological interventions are no different than genetic interventions, and there is no difference between genetic enhancement and treating a disease. Then, he continues to justify how we should indicate what qualities in our genes should be decided to enhance. Throughout this section, the author exemplifies different methods of how humans have decided on this, such as pre-modern and modern eugenics, and the Nazis. Additionally, the author argues that genetic enhancement should be a part of the principle of procreative …show more content…
As explained in the article, health is instrumentally valuable regardless of where one stands concerning moral theories, thus being healthy permits for one to live a good life. Conversely, disease hinders one from being able to lead a good life, as someone stricken with Alzheimer’s may not be able to recollect where they are; what is more, a person with Down Syndrome is limited in the number of lives they are able to follow. Genetic intervention may remove these limitations from one’s genes, so their offspring are able to live the best possible life they can strive for. Furthermore, I accept the argument proposed above since treatments and preventatives serve similar purposes as genetic enhancement, so to obstruct access to genetic enhancement is similar to preventing a mother’s child in need of medical attention from receiving such