The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering

What core values underlie Sandel’s opposition to genetic engineering in humans? How does he articulate these values and make the case for their application to this developing branch of science and medicine?

Critically examine the Epilogue about stem cell research. How does this new chapter contribute to the overall point Sandel is making? How does he draw a moral distinction between stem cell research and bioengineering?

Sandel argues that bioengineering of children represents an unhealthy degree of control over those children’s future lives and identities. In what way is this kind of control different from the control exerted by parents who pressure their children to excel in school and athletics or who steer them toward certain career paths?

Sandel’s argument against bioengineering rests on a dichotomy between Openness to the Unbidden and Mastery and Control. This argument raises the question: To what extent should we embrace the natural course of human development versus seeking to control and perfect it through technological means?

Consider the moral arguments Sandel is making in this text. How do they align or conflict with a purely utilitarian view of the genetic engineering?

Sandel presents genetic engineering as part of a “new eugenics” that preserves many of the goals of the “old eugenics” while ostensibly removing its racist and coercive elements. What values or objectives remain the same between the new eugenics and the old? Which have shifted?

How does Sandel balance appeals to emotion (pathos) with appeals to reason (logos) in building his argument against bioengineering? What role does emotion have in this debate?

Sandel’s book reflects the values and technological prospects of the time in which he wrote it. How have discussions of bioengineering changed in the past 20 years? How have these changes impacted Sandel’s arguments?