In this blog post, we explore how effort and free will can alter destiny even amidst the inequality created by genetic information, as depicted in the film Gattaca, and reflect on the value of choice.
The film ‘Gattaca’ is a satirical portrayal of a future society where genetically engineered, custom-made humans are the majority, and where ordinary individuals born without genetic modification face unequal treatment based on their genetic information. The film’s lesson is that human effort matters more than a meritocracy, and that the process, rather than the outcome, is what truly makes us human. Crucially, it prompts deep reflection on the ethical and moral impacts of technological advancement on society. It invites us to consider what opportunities genetic engineering could offer humanity, and what new forms of discrimination and inequality might arise as a result.
The customized humans depicted in the film are portrayed as beings whose futures are predetermined by genetic manipulation, leaving them unable to freely choose their destinies. However, the protagonist strives to become a space navigator, pursuing his dream rather than following a predetermined path. Despite others viewing this negatively, the protagonist ultimately achieves his dream. Through this process, we are reminded of the importance of human will and effort. Furthermore, the film demonstrates how resilient human will can be in pursuing dreams under any circumstances.
Of course, the film depicts customized humans as robotic beings stripped of free will, presenting a more idealized critique for easier message delivery. Those critical of these customized humans argue: “Customized humans are individuals who, from birth, cannot exercise free will. They are only able to choose futures tailored to others’ demands. Thus, those who lose free will live without their own dreams. Therefore, strictly speaking, they cannot be considered human beings who know how to exercise free will; they should be viewed as organic robots.”
However, my perspective differs slightly. I do agree that genetic modification, being imposed without regard for the subject’s opinion, prevents the realization of free will. It remains an unalterable fact that genetic modification is often performed based on the will of parents or the government. It is correct to view such manipulation as an attempt to shape the subject into a desired form. Yet, observing real humans, one must question whether decisions are always made through free will. You know well that this is not always the case. The options available for decision-making are not all placed on an equal footing. While such inequality might be seen as arising naturally, it can also be created by the will of others. Furthermore, differences in social and economic background or environment also influence our choices.
Consider, for example, a person who borrowed money from a gangster, whose debt period has passed, and who lacks the ability to repay. The gangster threatens the debtor to either repay the money or sell an organ. In this case, while the debtor has several options presented, they can only choose between the two demands made by the gangster. Repaying the money is realistically impossible. However, selling an organ is possible, so the debtor chooses to sell an organ. Can this choice then be considered one made based on free will? Of course not. It is correct to view the gangster’s threats as suppressing free will, with the intentional intervention of another person influencing the subject’s decision-making to steer them toward the desired outcome. In other words, free will did not manifest.
Next, let’s assume the debtor wrote a promissory note pledging to sell their organ and then fled. Now, the choice to flee is a result made based on free will after the suppression of decision-making by others was lifted, allowing freedom of choice. This is clearly a case where free will was exercised.
So, what is the point of this example? Let’s reconsider the concept of a customized human. Custom-made humans involve the intervention of others’ wills from the very beginning. But even if intervention occurs from the start, does that mean free will cannot manifest in subsequent decisions given to the subject? I don’t think so. Even in our current situation, while the initial case involves no intervention of others’ wills, subsequent decisions are similarly influenced by the wills of parents or others. We end up choosing from those limited options. Up to this point, it is identical to the case of a custom-made human. However, as adults, we express our own will in most decisions. Critics believe that a custom-made human cannot choose even as an adult. Even if another’s will was involved from the very beginning, would it continue that way until the very end? I don’t think so. Even a custom-made human will eventually face a moment when they must decide by their own will, and through that expression of free will, they will feel their humanity.
Most people watching the film are only enthusiastic about the protagonist and pay no attention to Eugene. He was like a mere machine part, walking a predetermined path rather than pursuing a dream he chose himself. But after his injury, he broke free from the constraints of societal expectations. He found himself at a crossroads where he could choose freely. This demonstrates that even a custom-made human can be a ‘human’ capable of exercising free will. Eugene’s story offers a fresh perspective on the critical view of genetically engineered humans, showing that every person possesses the potential to overcome their circumstances and manifest true free will.
The film ‘Gattaca’ transcends a simple critique of inequality in a future society; it is a work that awakens us to the essence of humanity, free will, and the importance of striving to achieve one’s dreams. Through this, we recognize the dual nature of technological advancement and are compelled to ponder what it means to be human. By reflecting contemporary societal issues through the theme of genetic manipulation and prompting us to envision our future, this film poses the question of what constitutes humanity as technology advances. Therefore, we must continually strive to preserve our humanity and free will.
