[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s seems to happen regularly these days, scientific developments have turned science fiction into science fact.
It is now feasible for humans to ‘edit’ their genes, perhaps much like I, a writer, am editing this article and ensuring every aspect of it meets my expectations before it goes to print. The technology called CRISPR has been touted as revolutionary; Gizmag stated this month that it could be effective in tackling blindness, while ArtsTechnica claims it may eliminate conditions such as muscular dystrophy.
Moreover, in the near future, humans may be able to have geneticists edit their children’s genes. A scary proposition perhaps for aficionados like Asimov, Ellison, and their ilk. These science fiction writers, through narrative, told morality plays and cautionary tales warning of the dangers of unchecked human ambition.
It may sound slightly silly to say it, but perhaps we should go back to the realm of what once was science fiction then, to understand what we are getting ourselves into. These stories are often not merely entertainment, but important cultural artifacts about where our culture has been and where it might be going. Many cultures place great importance on stories as a way of passing on meaning, something that North American culture seems to lack.
Much of the science fiction writing advocates extreme caution in the area of genetic engineering. They suggest that this is a Pandora’s Box that humanity must open very carefully, if at all. The benefits it could be great, but humanity may not be self-disciplined or benevolent enough as a whole to ensure this great power does not destroy it entirely.
One of my favourite treatments of the topic is a 90’s film called Gattaca. At the time this movie came out, such technology seemed at the very least, so futuristic that it wouldn’t exist in our lifetime. The film portrays a society in which gene editing has existed for some time, the technology is at a stage of maturity and has fundamentally changed and been integrated into the fabric of society.
In this post-genetic engineering society, technology has created a division between the haves and have-nots, with the line being those who had ‘natural’ births and those who were designed. In the film, Ethan Hawke plays a young man who aspires to become an astronaut, though he has an enormous barrier: not only in that he has natural, unedited, human flaws, but also that society harshly discriminates against him and all such people.
I won’t spoil the ending for you. However, considering the systemic and overt discrimination that humans have invoked historically, and continue to put on those who do not fall within the majority, the type of society that the film proposes is not a far-fetched proposition. Note that humanity has essentially faced the worst ethical perils of genetic engineering before.
Hitler’s attempts to wipe out those he considered inferior — non-whites, homosexuals, the disabled, mentally ill — was a form of genetic engineering as well. In his attempt to create the perfect Aryan race, surely he would have made use of this new technology if it was available at that time. Humanity ignores its own past at its great peril.
I am not suggesting that we should ban this technology outright, but that humanity should proceed with an extraordinary amount of caution. This could certainly be a pivotal moment in human history, like the the discovery of fire, the invention of farming, and the printing press. However, it should be treated like the discovery of fire; it could change our lives for the better, but if done irresponsibly, it could destroy us all.
3.This ‘cado ain’t big enough for the both of us 
