In this blog post, I’ll examine—through the movie ‘Gattaca’—the differences between “designer humans” and “natural humans,” the social issues and shifts in competition that may arise in the era of designer humans, and the potential impact of designer humans on social progress.
The Transition from Natural Humans to Designer Humans
“Gattaca” is a film that explores the contrast between ordinary “natural humans” and “designer humans”—perfect individuals from whom recessive genetic traits have been eliminated. Natural humans are deemed unqualified and become socially marginalized; the protagonist, “Vincent,” is one such person. Because he is at high risk for various diseases, including heart disease, he gives up his dream of becoming an astronaut and ends up working as a janitor for a space company. His younger brother, “Anton,” and “Jerome,” who lends his body to Vincent, are designer humans. Unlike natural humans, they belong to a socially recognized class. Overall, the film prompts us to consider what society would look like if an era of designer humans were to arrive in the future.
I interpreted the film as being set against the backdrop of a transitional period from the era of natural humans to that of designer humans. As seen in the film, this transitional period gives rise to a variety of problems—some of which are quite serious. The crux of these issues is the emergence of a new social hierarchy between natural humans and customized humans. With the establishment of this social hierarchy, people come to conclude—as depicted in the film—that “a person’s life is determined from the moment they are born.”
However, I believe drawing such a conclusion is a hasty judgment. I believe that, given the film’s historical setting, it is possible that everyone could become a “custom-made human” within a few decades. In the film, Vincent was born a “natural human” because his parents did not choose to have him as a “custom-made human.” In contrast, his younger brother Anton was born a “custom-made human” after an obstetrician advised Vincent and Anton’s parents that genetic selection and prescription were necessary. Since most parents hope their children will be a little healthier and smarter, “designer humans” are expected to gain popularity. The biggest obstacle to this is the economic barrier. However, this too is expected to gradually decrease over time. This is because, as new technologies emerge and time passes, the economic barriers to accessing those technologies often lower. Obstetrics is a prime example. Obstetrics and gynecology is another field where medical technology surrounding pregnancy and childbirth has advanced; it is very rare for pregnant women to forgo obstetric care simply because they face financial difficulties. If economic barriers continue to decrease, I believe it is possible that we will eventually enter an era of “custom-made humans.” Therefore, I think the distinction between “custom-made humans” and “natural humans”—as portrayed in the film—will become even more pronounced during this transitional period. This is because, if most people ultimately choose to have “custom-made humans,” the distinction between “natural humans” and “custom-made humans” itself will take on a different meaning than it does today.
What are the reasons for choosing “custom-made humans”?
There is one premise underlying what I wrote above. As I briefly mentioned, it is that “custom-made humans” are superior, so everyone seeks to give birth to them rather than “natural humans.” In the film, “custom-made humans” are born after undergoing genetic selection to reduce risk factors such as depression, drug addiction, premature hair loss, and nearsightedness. Therefore, we can infer that “custom-made humans” will be healthy, intelligent, and able to adapt easily to society. Furthermore, if the risk of illness for babies who are born with disabilities or pre-existing conditions can be reduced, the suffering experienced by their parents can also be alleviated. If everyone were born healthier and with superior abilities, this would greatly benefit not only the babies themselves but also their families and the broader society. Therefore, I believe there is a high likelihood that future society will move toward an era of “custom-made humans.”
However, real-world genetic engineering has not yet reached the level depicted in the movie.
Current gene-editing technologies are being used to treat specific genetic diseases or to study their causes, but they are still far from the stage where complex traits—such as intelligence or physical abilities, which are influenced by both multiple genes and the environment—can be safely enhanced in a desired direction. Therefore, the prospect of “custom-made humans” becoming widespread should still be viewed as merely a possibility. However, if genetic engineering technologies advance further in the future, it is entirely conceivable that parents will consider genetic choices regarding their children’s health and abilities.
Will “Designer Humans” Cause Social Stagnation?
The reference material “Problems with Designer Humans” raises concerns about the issues that designer humans might cause. The author of this article, Mr. Jang Se-won, argued that if a society of designer humans were to emerge, everyone would be exceptional, leading to social stagnation; people would avoid occupations that are socially stigmatized; and, because recessive genes would disappear, it would become difficult to adapt to changing environments. Mr. Jang Se-won therefore argued that a society of “natural humans” is more desirable. Among these points, I will focus on refuting the claim that society would stagnate.
I do not believe the argument that society will stagnate because everyone is socially superior, thereby eliminating the incentive to strive, is correct. In today’s society, even though everyone is on the same footing as “natural humans,” people still work hard and compete with one another. It is a natural inference that in the future, since everyone will be a “custom-made human,” they will compete with one another in their own ways. This is because they will all be on equal footing. In fact, I believe that competition in the future—being a contest among even more exceptional individuals—is likely to contribute more to society than current forms of competition. Science high schools serve as a good example. Just because many high-achieving students attend these schools does not mean they do not compete. On the contrary, each individual student must put in even more effort to outperform other high-achieving students.
Mr. Jang Se-won argued that, as an example of social stagnation, people would avoid certain professions because everyone would become socially superior. This, too, is incorrect. The “custom-made humans” in ‘Gattaca’ do not imply that all humans will become identical. The key is to reduce specific genetic risk factors present in each individual. Therefore, people do not all become equally excellent. I believe this is the biggest flaw in the reference material. In other words, it overlooks the fact that even if everyone becomes excellent, there will still be those who are more excellent and those who are less so. I believe that in future society, just as in today’s natural human society, the more excellent people are and the harder they work, the greater their achievements will be. Conversely, we can infer that people with relatively lower competitiveness will be forced into less desirable occupations.
Can competition drive social progress?
Now, let’s imagine that we are no longer limited to eliminating recessive genes but can actually manipulate genes. If that were the case, social progress could accelerate even further. Since everyone’s abilities would be superior, competition would become even fiercer, and we can expect the results of that competition to be even greater. In the era of natural humanity, many people give up, blaming their own abilities. However, in the era of customized humans, since people know their abilities are superior, I believe they will be able to compete effectively if they work hard on their own.
Even the “unpopular industries” cited as an example of social stagnation would no longer be a cause for concern. Let’s assume that everyone has become equally capable, rather than there being “superior” and “less capable” individuals. Would everyone avoid working in unpopular industries and instead seek out comfortable jobs or those that pay well? No. This is because, according to the market principles of supply and demand, unpopular industries are likely to offer higher wages, which would naturally generate demand for those jobs. It is a fundamental principle of economics that the laws of supply and demand apply to jobs as well. For example, doctors at university hospitals work in one of the most demanding professions, often performing surgeries that last for long hours. They must possess extensive knowledge, and because they deal with human lives, the psychological stress is considerable. Nevertheless, because of the high compensation and society’s demand for their expertise, many people still choose to become doctors.
Genes aren’t everything.
In the film’s final scene, Vincent—a “natural human”—defeats Anton, a “custom-made human,” in a swimming race. This scene illustrates that genetic limitations can be overcome to some extent through effort. However, it remains an undeniable fact that genetics are a crucial factor. One might argue that if Vincent had been a “custom-made human,” he would have become a more outstanding agent for the space company and would have won the swimming race against Anton by a landslide. By modifying genes, human society in the future has the potential to become even more competitive and progressive. As genetic conditions improve, people will be able to better realize their potential through hard work and effort. In this way, more outstanding individuals will be able to create a more enterprising society through healthy competition. Couldn’t “custom-made humans” then be an important step toward driving social progress?
