In this blog post, we explore the social benefits and potential risks brought by genetic engineering technology through the film ‘Gattaca’.
‘Gattaca’ is a film that deals with the theme of determining a child’s destiny through genetic manipulation before birth. In the future world depicted in the film, it is possible to analyze all of a human’s genes using samples like skin, urine, saliva, and hair. In that society, parents eliminate all their own genetic flaws and create children with only the most superior genes through artificial insemination. These children are raised as the society’s elite and are entrusted with all important tasks. However, even in this society, children are born through natural conception. These children inherit their parents’ inferior traits and are branded as ‘Invalid’ by society. The protagonist, Vincent, dreams of becoming an astronaut, but because he was born through natural conception, he is constantly rejected and never even gets past the company’s doorstep. The film depicts an extremely controlled society that eliminates all possibilities for the Invalids. Yet Vincent refuses to be defeated. He overcomes his circumstances by deceiving society with fake genes, aided by Eugene Morrow, who possesses dominant genes.
This film presents a harsh future world where humanity is disregarded and perfection is the supreme virtue. In this future society, science is so advanced that a child’s expected lifespan and susceptibility to various diseases are analyzed immediately after birth. Consequently, misfits like Vincent must abandon their dreams early on. In the film, Vincent’s father emphasizes the impossibility of his son’s aspirations, saying things like, “You’d be lucky to get a janitorial job at that company,” and “Who would invest in someone like you?”
Released in 1998, this film is already 25 years old, yet it still offers many points of contention. Among these, I wish to express my opinion on the debate surrounding ‘designer babies’ born through genetic manipulation.
Genetic research made tremendous strides starting with Watson and Crick’s discovery of the double helix structure of DNA in 1953. It culminated in the Human Genome Project in 1990, which mapped the entire human genome and revealed the complete sequence of DNA, enabling us to successfully understand all human genetic information. In the not-too-distant future, we might even create near-perfect humans by eliminating parents’ genetic defects before a child is born, much like in the movie ‘Gattaca’.
However, if that happens, genetic research will inevitably become entangled in ethical issues, as it always has been. Proponents of ‘designer babies’ argue that if genetic manipulation is used to treat a child’s genetic disease, it could enable early treatment of conditions like Down syndrome or Edwards syndrome, yielding positive effects. Yet this too risks becoming entangled in the thorny debate over where to draw the line for treatment. For instance, diseases potentially influenced by genetics range widely from cancer, hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease to obesity, hair loss, and malocclusion. While these factors can also arise from acquired lifestyle habits, modern medicine places significant emphasis on genetic factors as causes. Therefore, if early treatment is possible, there is no reason not to treat such conditions. However, if the scope of treatment expands to this extent, it ultimately becomes indistinguishable from creating near-perfect ‘custom-made humans’ by eliminating parental genetic defects. Therefore, the argument that genetic manipulation is necessary for therapeutic purposes seems to lack clear criteria for defining the boundaries of such treatment.
Furthermore, we have not clearly defined what constitutes a ‘defect’. Just as the disabled character with six fingers in the movie became an outstanding pianist and received universal acclaim, what we perceive as a ‘defect’ could conversely be an advantage. Moreover, the type of ‘custom-made human’ could vary depending on one’s future aspirations. For instance, while height is advantageous for basketball players, shorter stature is often more beneficial for gymnastics or skating. We must ensure that our beautiful flaws do not go unnoticed, judged by the vague standard of ‘superiority’ – a concept as ambiguous as ‘defect’ itself.
Furthermore, the universal production of ‘customized humans’ could harm human genetic diversity. Since humans first appeared 2 million years ago, we have thrived in diverse environments based on genetic diversity. However, if customized humans emerge, a large number of genetically ‘superior’ individuals with eliminated defects would exist in society. Their offspring would similarly inherit these ‘superior’ genes, leading to a reduction in genetic diversity. Therefore, if the environment suddenly changes or a pandemic spreads, populations could face a risk of reduced survival if they lack the genes necessary to develop immune systems capable of adapting to new diseases. Some counter this argument by suggesting we could produce ‘custom humans’ who are less susceptible to disease or possess scientific minds capable of effectively controlling the environment or pandemics. However, this argument is far too abstract and unrealistic. It advocates creating an imaginary perfect human—strongly immune and intelligent—without any ability to predict what future epidemics might emerge or what environmental changes might occur.
Finally, the birth of ‘custom humans’ would inherently cause social imbalance. In the film, Vincent was born naturally as an ‘Invalid,’ while his brother Anton was born a ‘Valid’ through genetic manipulation. These two become dramatic points of comparison in the film. Vincent became an astronaut through deceit and relentless effort, while his brother Anton, thanks to his superior genes, ascended more easily to a high position within the company. In other words, ‘custom-made humans’ like Anton form the upper echelons of society from birth, while ‘natural humans’ like Vincent, born from traditional couples, are treated as inferior and pushed to the lower strata. Moreover, creating ‘custom humans’ in reality would require significant financial investment. This means those currently in the upper echelons could produce children with superior genes, ensuring their offspring also join the elite. However, once pushed into the lower class, they would be unable to produce ‘custom humans,’ potentially deepening social polarization and perpetuating class inheritance.
In other words, as the absurdity of the future world depicted in the film highlights, we must maintain a critical perspective toward genetic manipulation that values innate superiority as a virtue. If genetic manipulation becomes feasible in the not-too-distant future, careful consideration will be necessary before hastily introducing it.
