The Case against Perfection
Picture this; a teenager, Jason, has been awarded a scholarship to a prestigious university because of his prowess in basketball. Ideally, a full-ride athletic scholarship cover is a rare opportunity which allows an athlete to pursue academics as well as pursue sportsmanship. However, when Jason joins the university basketball team, he discovers that most of his colleagues are tall and well built. University sportsmanship is a competitive sector, and the slightest mistake would see Jason lose his place in the team and consequently, his scholarship. Without genetically modifying his physique, Jason would have to work tirelessly to prove his prowess. However, with genetic modification, Jason can undergo hormone treatment which would adjust his muscles and height, to the preference of his basketball team. Whereas one would argue that Jason should stick to rigorous training to achieve perfection, another person would say that the hallmark of sports is excellence and not effort; thus, Jason can seek a genetic modification to excel in sportsmanship. The moral and ethical debates surrounding genetic modification require a keen eye to discern the double standards surrounding the topic. Michael Sandel engages his readers in a deep dive in the article, “The Case against Perfection.” In the article, Sandel looks at both sides of the debate, reasons that justify genetic engineering and reasons that demoralize the genetic technology. Throughout the article, Sandal argues that genetic modification should be a personal choice. Just as parents seek the best services to better the future of their children, they should be at liberty to choose the best genetic composition for their children. Although Sandal explores the concerns of the people against genetic engineering, his argument is primarily inclined towards supporting genetic modification. In his case, Sandel makes use of several rhetoric strategies to craft his argument, reason his opinions, and appeal to the audience.
“The Case Against Perfection” article is timely considering the moral and ethic debate surrounding genetic modification and genetic engineering. In the introduction section, Sandel introduces the concept of genetic engineering by discussing cloning. Although cloning was not a success, other significant genetic breakthroughs have been achieved successfully. As the article progresses, Sandel discusses the genetic enhancements options that are already available and the moral debates surrounding their application. The examples of the already available genetic engineering services include muscle enhancement, memory enhancement, height enhancement as well as sex selection. Sandel explores the concerns of people against the biotechnology while weighing their concerns against available facts. Throughout the article, Sandel argues that genetic modification should be a matter of personal choice as long as it is safe. In contrast to the past genetic ventures, modern biotechnology is available to all people regardless of their social class. Therefore, people should be at liberty to seek perfection by modifying their genes to their preference.
Ethos
Ethos is a rhetorical technique used to appeal to a target audience using the credibility of the speaker. Ethos builds confidence since the person presenting is credible and believable. When a person passing a message or presenting an argument is trustworthy, communication takes place effectively. For instance, when a professor of political sciences addresses a political concern, people are more likely to align with the view of the professor because of credibility and believability. At present, many companies seek to promote their products through celebrities and social media influencers because a huge following implies that the person is believable and credible. Michael Sandel has relied on his true professionalism to sway his readers. On the first page of the article, the flush bottom left corner bears information about Sandel. Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard University where he holds prestigious positions including serving on the President’s Council on Bioethics. Based on his academic achievement, Sandel is a credible source of information. Furthermore, Sandel teaches at Harvard University, one of the best universities in the world. The article has been published in The Atlantic Monthly, a renowned American magazine. Sandel has used his professionalism and a credible medium to build confidence in his target audience.
Logos
Logos implies using logic and facts as evidence to convince the target audience. When an idea is backed up by irrefutable facts, it can create a logical argument which can sway the target audience effortlessly. One can present a coherent argument by referencing previous research to support claims or using statistics and facts. Sandel is well aware of the effectiveness of logos in substantiating a claim. Therefore, Sandel has used facts and statistics to back his argument. When discussing height enhancement, Sandel refers to a case in 1996, where 40% of the human hormone prescriptions were used for non-medical purposes (4). Therefore, people started embracing genetic modification long before the advent of modern biotechnology. In another instance, Sandel gives a detailed description of how sexual selection takes place through In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). The article articulates a step by step procedure of how parents select gene compositions for their children by discarding defective embryos (4). Furthermore, Sandel refers to Lawrence Diller, the author of Running on Ritalin, where Diller states that an approximated five million American children are prescribed Ritalin and other stimulants to increase their attention spans (8). Also, the article mentions several biotechnology companies and their criteria for modifying genes.
In the counter argument, Sandel also uses facts to support the claims of the people against genetic modification. The article mentions a science fiction movie called Gattaca, where parents screen embryos and chose their preferred genetic composition and discarded the unwanted embryos. Such a Gattaca-like world would be unfriendly to the children harboring “unwanted” genetic makeup. The movie referred to in the article is an example of what the world would change if people become free to choose the preferred genetic composition of their children.
Pathos
Pathos is an appeal to emotions. An argument based on pathos can be manipulative because more often than not, people make decisions based on their feelings. However, most emotional cases are best for advertisements and not for topics such as biotechnology. Therefore, the best use of pathos in this article is by combining facts and emotions. Sandel utilizes the technique of combining facts and feelings in presenting his ideas about genetic engineering. The debate about genetic modification is an emotional argument since it is based on what people consider moral and ethical. Therefore, Sandel has used emotional words to evoke the feelings of his audience.
Sandel suggests that the real reason behind the moral debate about genetic modification is the accessibility of the services (3). People are concerned whether genetic enhancement will be available to people of all social classes. Although the genetic enhancements would “dehumanize” human beings, people rallying against improvements are worried that the services will not be equally distributed to all people seeking enhancement. Therefore, if genetic enhancement were made available to all people, then people would accept genetic engineering.
Sex selection evokes emotions against genetic modification. Through IVF, parents can choose the sex of their children as well as their preferred genetic composition (4). Several embryos are fertilized in a petri dish from where their sex and genetic structure can be identified. The embryos with desired traits are implanted and the rest discarded. People objecting sexual selection equates the process of abortion. Since the embryos have already started developing, discarding the unwanted ones is similar to abortion. Therefore, pro-life activists can align with this emotional argument in the article.
Sandel evokes emotions by isolating the moral obligation tied to genetic modification. Parents seek perfection for their children in all aspects of life. Wealthy and influential people enroll their children in the best schools, hire tutors to prepare them for SAT exams as well as enroll them in activities such as ballet dancing and piano lessons. Similarly, parents are at liberty to choose the best genetic combination for their children. Sandel asks, “if it is permissible and even admirable for parents to help their children, why is it not equally admirable for parents to use whatever genetic technology to enhance their children’s intelligence, musical ability or athletic prowess?” (8). Therefore, parents should be at liberty to choose the children they desire.
Conclusion
Sandel has used rhetoric techniques to present his main arguments. The moral and ethical debate surrounding genetic modification requires a thorough assessment. Through ethos, Sandel presents himself as a credible character due to his professionalism. Also, logos have been used strengthened the main idea by using irrefutable facts and statistics. By appealing to the emotion of the audience, Sandel has passed his message about genetic modification effectively.
Works Cited
Sandel, Michael J. The case against perfection. Harvard University Press, 2009.