The problem of breeding their species […]. The problem cannot be solved unless the immense influence of heredity is fully taken into account…” (Dykes, 2008, p. 1). What Teddy Roosevelt was referring to was the idea of improving the human population. Today, plant breeding is paired specifically with technology, but throughout history, plant breeding has been a very popular but controversial topic. It can be traced back to ancient times when men chose wives who they believed would produce the best offspring. Then genetic improvement became extremely popular in the 19th century, when Charles Darwin brought the idea of natural selection and eugenics to society. And today new advances are being made, where technology is introduced with genetic improvement. With this new technology, scientists and ethicists are having a hard time finding an answer as to whether this new and growing genetic improvement technology should be allowed or not. We, the society, must analyze the situation very carefully and ask ourselves: should genetic improvement be allowed in society or not? Genetic improvement is very similar to genetic engineering. But many ethicists believe that genetic engineering is necessary, but genetic enhancement is not. GE is the process by which parents choose certain traits for their offspring (children). It starts with parents telling the doctor what characteristics they would like to see implemented in their child, eye color, height, intelligence, etc. Then the doctor would take the embryo from the woman's fetuses and insert..... .middle of paper……city. The company would open Pandora's box by unleashing genetic improvement. Francis Fukuyama (2004), professor of international political economy at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, urges society to consider humility when it comes to genetic improvement: “If we don't develop it (humility) soon, we may unintentionally invite transhumanists (GE) to deface humanity with their genetic bulldozers and psychotropic shopping malls (p. 2). How we respond to upcoming events and future policies regarding genetic improvement will change our lives forever. If we do not act accordingly, society as we know it may be devalued compared to what Francis Fukuyama suggested. Genetic improvement will not lead to biodiversity and end our long and prosperous evolutionary phases. You would like to leave this turmoil to future generations?

Topic > The problem of breeding their species […]. The problem cannot be solved unless the immense influence of heredity is fully taken into account…” (Dykes, 2008, p. 1). What Teddy Roosevelt was referring to was the idea of improving the human population. Today, plant breeding is paired specifically with technology, but throughout history, plant breeding has been a very popular but controversial topic. It can be traced back to ancient times when men chose wives who they believed would produce the best offspring. Then genetic improvement became extremely popular in the 19th century, when Charles Darwin brought the idea of natural selection and eugenics to society. And today new advances are being made, where technology is introduced with genetic improvement. With this new technology, scientists and ethicists are having a hard time finding an answer as to whether this new and growing genetic improvement technology should be allowed or not. We, the society, must analyze the situation very carefully and ask ourselves: should genetic improvement be allowed in society or not? Genetic improvement is very similar to genetic engineering. But many ethicists believe that genetic engineering is necessary, but genetic enhancement is not. GE is the process by which parents choose certain traits for their offspring (children). It starts with parents telling the doctor what characteristics they would like to see implemented in their child, eye color, height, intelligence, etc. Then the doctor would take the embryo from the woman's fetuses and insert..... .middle of paper……city. The company would open Pandora's box by unleashing genetic improvement. Francis Fukuyama (2004), professor of international political economy at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, urges society to consider humility when it comes to genetic improvement: “If we don't develop it (humility) soon, we may unintentionally invite transhumanists (GE) to deface humanity with their genetic bulldozers and psychotropic shopping malls (p. 2). How we respond to upcoming events and future policies regarding genetic improvement will change our lives forever. If we do not act accordingly, society as we know it may be devalued compared to what Francis Fukuyama suggested. Genetic improvement will not lead to biodiversity and end our long and prosperous evolutionary phases. You would like to leave this turmoil to future generations?