|
|
Evolution is what allows us to move on and survive as a species. Without evolution it is quite possible that human beings would not exist on this planet. Thus supporting evolution is vital to human beings. So why are we working against evolution? Now it is quite possible you are wondering how we could be de-evolving ourselves. Well, it is quite simple. It is the fault of medical technology. Think about it: part of evolution's way of evolving is through mutations of our genes. This is completely random and can have either positive, negative, or neutral effects. Unfortunately, positive effects are not often as frequent as negative effects. So, as with any other evolving species, mankind has the occasional negative mutated characteristic. Most negative genetic characteristics that everyone is aware of are genetic diseases. Some examples are Alzheimers, cancer, and sickle-cell anemia. These are all genetically based, and thus are passed down to people from their parents. Modern medicine allows people who suffer from these awful afflictions to functino in life rather well. Well enough, in fact, to have children. But this passes on their genetic disorder, which can fairly be viewed as a genetic defect. So modern medicine has allowed genetically flawed people to pass on their genetic flaws to children who then continue to pass it on. If modern medicine did not get in the way many of these genetic defects would have taken their toll on the person suffering from their genetic defect and would not have reached the age to bear young, thus ending the defect with them. This does not happen in our society. Instead we keep evolution from weeding out genetic defects and, actually, promote the defects. We have become a society that promotes individual life over evolution. So the philosophical dilemna for this rant is what is more important: allowing genetically flawed people to have children, or allow evolution to take its course and forward the improvement of homo sapiens. I believe that there is a middle ground to this situation. What should probably occur is what fascists would probably support:sterilization. Genetic techniques are beginning to allow us to test people for genetic diseases early on in life. This would allow us to figure out who is in a word "dragging" down our species and to sterilize them to prevent the further spread of the genetic defect. This allows the person to live out their life and keep the genetic defect from entering the gene pool. The people with the defect could even adopt if they feel the urge to have children. This way no one is severely hurt. The alternatives are much worse than this. Obviously some religions would have some serious problems with this since it is stopping life from occuring, although it is probably viewed in a much more positive light than abortion. The categorical imperative has no quarrels with this and of course existentialists do not. So there are only religious problems with this viewpoint. |