One world health and the environment

0 / 5. 0

One world health and the environment

Category: Research Paper

Subcategory: Ethnic

Level: College

Pages: 2

Words: 550

Student’s Name
Instructor’s Name
Course
Date
One world health and the environment
Argue for or against Fukuyama’s claim that “a biotechnology that seeks to manipulate human nature not only risks consequences, but can undermine the very basis of equal democratic rights as well”
Biotechnology can be defined as the harnessing of cellular as well as biomolecular processes in the development of technologies and a variety of products that are used in enhancing human lives by helping combat diseases as well as other global problems such as hunger. The biotechnological solutions have widely been used to address food security problems and providing treatments for previously untreatable diseases. With the World’s population growing exponentially, the need to have food security and to safeguard the future generations has called for modern solutions such as biotechnology (McKenny 20). Biotechnology not only promises mankind of solutions to food problems, but its medical advancements promise a profound effect on the medical field and eradication of diseases that were once thought to be incurable or chronic. However, biotechnology‘s effect on medical advancements has its effects. While it may provide solutions to address global problems, it introduces challenges that may not be realized in the short term period may alter the human history in years to come. Francis Fukuyama, in his book entitled, ‘Our Posthuman Future,’ he argues that as much s biotechnology is being used positively to help address most of mankind’s chronic problems, it also introduces challenges to human nature. The use of biotechnology to alter the human DNA and subsequent generations has a far-reaching impact on the future of mankind. According to Fukuyama, the trend signals the end of history and the beginning of an unpredictable democratic era. In this essay, Fukuyama’s claims are discussed, and the truth in the assertions will be sought.
Fukuyama argues that the human nature is at stake due to the rapid advancements in medicine, especially biotechnology (Fukuyama 157). His claim is based on the assertion that the human values and human rights are based on the human nature as humans understand it. The human nature is rooted in the basic biological makeup of mankind. Biotechnology and the alterations that it is doing on the human genetic makeup is interfering with human nature (Fukuyama 157), hence the claim by Fukuyama, that an international regulation on biotechnological advancements need to be put in place to ensure that human nature does not continue to be interfered with.
Democracy and global human rights are based on the understanding that humans have on human nature and the basic needs of humans. Altering human DNA and, therefore, human nature will have an effect on human nature and democratic rights of mankind globally. While Fukuyama argues that altering the human DNA has an impact on the democratic space of existing humans, it is imperative to note that the medical advancements, if regulated, they may not interfere with the societal cultures. Due to the inability to accurately determine the effect that the biotechnological advancements have on the societal values and the democratic rights of nations globally (Fukuyama 157), it is fair to support the notion by Fukuyama that the medical advancements in the biotechnological field need regulation to ensure that human nature is left uninterrupted and that mankind maintains its course in history. In conclusion, it is imperative that human nature is protected from the biotechnological advancements that threaten the human nature as we know it and in so doing, protect the democratic rights of mankind and equality of all humans.
Works Cited
Fukuyama, F. (2012). Agency or Inevitability: Will Human Beings Control Their Technological Future?. Ethics, Aesthetics and Politics of Biotechnological Challenges, 3, 157.
McKenny, G. (2013). Biotechnology and the Normative Significance of Human Nature: A Contribution from Theological Anthropology. Studies in Christian Ethics, 26(1), 18-36.