Summary Of Ethics And The New Genetics

In “Ethics and the New Genetics” the Dalai Lama makes the argument that with new technology, new ethical concerns are raised. He believes that with the rapid increase of new technology being invented, there needs to be a larger focus on the ethical threats that they pose. In “The New Civil Rights” by Kenji Yoshino, the Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at New York University, a similar argument is made. His argument is that with the rapid increase of groups in a diverse society a new civil rights is needed. As a gay man he believes that society needs to move on from the argument of civil rights to one of universal rights. By combining the viewpoints of the two authors, the best means of balancing political rights and
technological progress is by using reason-forcing conversations and a liberty paradigm in order to come up with rules that govern the use of new technologies. Covering is a term that Kenji Yoshino introduces in his essay. He defines covering as “toning down a disfavored identity to fit into the mainstream” (Yoshino 552). People who feel that they will be prosecuted for being a certain way, decide to hide who they really are. Instead they present a false self to society instead of their true self. This false self is a fake persona or attitude that they present to the world because they believe that people will then view them as “normal”. Kenji Yoshino states, “The distinction between ones true self and false self is what is useful in tracking the distinction between the uncovered and covered selves” (Yoshino 554). The two go hand in hand as people use covering in order to portray a false self to society. Many people cover or present a false self for different reasons. Covering can stem from a person wanting society to take them more seriously and not focus on their “bad” identity. They may want to highlight a certain issue but instead of the focus be on that issue it is on how they are different from society. Equality paradigms tend to point out the differences of a group instead of showing what they have in common with society. When an equality claim is made, instead of pointing out how those individuals should have the same right as every other human being, it instead highlights the difference of that group from everyone else. It also results in the singling out of a small percentage of the population instead of focusing on the rights of everyone. As Kenji Yoshino states in his essay, “Equality claims –– such as group-based accommodation claims –– inevitably involve the Court in picking favorites among groups. In an increasingly pluralistic society, the Court understandably wishes to steer clear of that enterprise” (Yoshino 556). To achieve equal rights for everyone the argument needs to be about the rights of every single person instead of just a particular group. This is why the use of an equality paradigm is not useful in achieving rights for people as it puts the focus more on the individual or individuals than the actual issue. Kenji Yoshino mentions in his essay of the need for a new civil rights. This is because he believes that the current civil rights argument encourages covering. He states in his essay that, “Civil rights unduly focused on what distinguished individuals from one another, rather than emphasizing what they had in common” (Yoshino 556). If civil rights are changed into universal rights, with the use of a liberty paradigm, then everyone’s right will be taken into consideration and no group or individual will be single out and stereotyped in the process. A better-suited paradigm for achieving rights for everyone is a liberty paradigm.
This paradigm focuses on the rights of every individual instead of singling out a certain group or individual. In the 2004 Tennessee v Lane case where the court decided on whether two paraplegic individuals could sue Tennessee for not making their courthouse accessible to disabled people, “the court ruled in favor of the minority group without framing its ruling in group-based equality rhetoric” (Yoshino 555). By doing this they made the argument that everyone has the right to be able to access the court instead of only arguing that disabled people have the right to access the courts. They made the same argument in the Lawrence v. Texas case. This case involved the Supreme Court knocking down Texas statue that criminalized same-sex sodomy (Yoshino 555). When the court knocked down the statue they made the argument that the statue violated the rights of everyone and not just gay people. They made the shift from an equality-based claim to a liberty-based claim. Kenji Yoshino states that “Liberty claims emphasize what all Americans have in common” (Yoshino 556). This why it is better suited for arguments pertaining to the rights of
people. The Dalai Lama’s argument about the ethics concerning new technology requires the use of a liberty paradigm. As stated before, liberty claims shift the focus of the argument from the rights of one group to the rights of every person. Scientific advancements affect society as a whole and every organism, human or non-human, should be considered when deciding the use of a new technology. Typically when deciding on the use of new technology, the rights of the animals that are being tested are not considered. This is why a liberty paradigm is needed so that every organism affected by the technology can be taken into account. In the case of the evolving new procedure known as reproductive cloning, the rights of many different groups should be involved in determining the use. With reproductive cloning there are the rights of the scientist who do the cloning, the rights of the person or animal being cloned and the rights of the cloned organism to take into account. With all these different sets of groups to consider, a liberty paradigm is needed to make sure that all the individuals involved are given equal rights. Currently reproductive cloning of humans have not been successful but it has been done on animals. These cloned animals tend to have shorter lives than the animals they were cloned from due to health problems that arise. The ethical concern of breeding an animal that will essentially suffer and have a short life should be taken into account when deciding on whether it should be allowed. As society continues to evolve and new technology is made, there needs to be a switch from civil rights to universal rights. This will allow the rights of every organism that is affected by the technology to be taken into consideration. Society is also constantly changing and the needs of people are rapidly changing with it. In the song “The Times They Are A-Changin” by Bob Dylan, he does a great job of warning the older generation about how quickly time changes. He advises them to either accept the changes or move out of the way. It is sometimes difficult for society to realize that with new technology come new problems. Everyone should be willing to notice the change, accept it, and try their best to make sure that this change is beneficial to society. He also encourages people to use reason-forcing conversations in coming up with a way to make this progress beneficial. New technology is being developed at a fast rate, making it hard to keep up with the ethical concerns that they cause.
As the Dalai Lama said, “The rapid increase in human knowledge and the technological possibilities emerging in the new genetic science are such that it is now almost impossible for ethical thinking to keep pace with these changes” (Dalai Lama 133). Society needs to be able to be reasonable about the use of a new technology if it the ethics surrounding it is not right. There needs to always be an emphasis placed on the problems that theses technology bring in order to prevent a person’s right from being taken away from them due to that technology. This requires that here is always reason-forcing conversation when the use of a new technology is being
considered. Reason-forcing conversations will make it possible to balance political rights and technological development. People need to be made aware of the ethics surrounding new technology. For this to happen there needs to be conversations about how this technology can affect everyone and the steps that can be taken to make sure that everyone’s rights are protected. Society needs to be educated of the consequences that come with scientific advancements before any laws can be made about them. As the Dalai Lama states, “Education needs to provide not only training in empirical facts of science but also an examination of the relationship between science and society at large, including the ethical questions raised by new technological possibilities” (Dalai Lama 138). In order for the use of new technology to be governed properly people need to rely somewhat on their moral compass. This is because a person’s moral compass helps them to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. In the case of the use of war drones in combat a person’s moral compass does not get to govern the use of this device. This is because the technology removes them from the battlefield and they are not able to judge the surroundings and make a decision based on the consequences that the technology will cause. This is why a person’s moral compass is important when it comes to new technology as it can help them better judge whether the technology will be beneficial or purely detrimental. The Dalai Lama and Kenji Yoshino both make great points that can be used to govern the use of new technology. With the Dalai Lama’s viewpoint an emphasis is placed on the ethical problems that new technology pose. Kenji Yoshino’s viewpoint ensures that everyone’s right is taken into consideration when deciding the use of new technology by using a liberty paradigm and having reason-forcing conversation. Together their viewpoints can ensure that there is a balance when it comes to political rights and technological progress.