The Genetic Engineering Debate

28.11.23

The Young Family

Read the following text carefully. As you read, consider the author's perspective on technological progress and bioethics.

I take it for granted that technology will continue to advance. There are people trying to resist technological advancement as a whole, but I am not one of them. On the other hand, I'm not unquestioning of technology. I do not think technology is good or bad, it is just technology. And as technology progresses, we will need to figure out how we are going to use it. Over the years, various technologies, especially medical ones, have really changed our idea of what it means to be human. During this time, ideas about our impact on and responsibilities towards our environment have also evolved. It used to be that we defined 'technology' as that which we can control and 'nature' that which we cannot, but we would like to tame. These definitions do not longer apply. Our attitude changed under the influence of technological progress. Nature has gone from being the uncontrolled wild to being a 'resource' to be exploited.

In terms of the real world, these are some of the key issues that I am trying to question and discuss with my work. I’m not pessimistic about developments in biotechnology. We are living in a great time with a lot of opportunities, but opportunities don't always turn out for the best. I just think we should discuss the full implications of these opportunities.

So if we look at The Young Family we see a mother creature with her babies. Her facial expression is very thoughtful. I imagine this creature to be bred for organ transplants. At the moment we are trying to do such a thing with pigs, so I gave her some pig-like features. That is the purpose humanity has chosen for her. Yet she has children of her own that she nurtures and loves. That is a side-effect beyond our control, as there will always be.

That is what makes the question of breeding animals purely for organ-transfer so difficult to answer. On one hand we need organs to help people in need, on the other hand we are looking at an animal that wants to exist for the sake of itself. I can't help but feel an enormous empathy for this creature. And, to be very honest, if it would save the life of one of my children, I would be will to take one of these organs. I know it is probably not ethically right but sometimes honesty, emotions, empathy and ethics don't always line up. (by Patricia Piccinini)

After reading the text, discuss the following questions in your group. One person in your group should take notes on key arguments and disagreements. Be prepared to share your insights in the class discussion.

Is it morally justifiable to breed and use animals for medical purpose?

The artist feels compassion for the mother creature, even though it was designed for a specific purpose. Can empathy influence our moral judgements about biotechnology? Should it?

Piccinini states that she would take an organ to save her child, even though she knows it is ethically questionable. Is it understandable to abandon moral beliefs when personal involvement is at stake?

The Genetic Engineering Debate

28.11.23

The Long Awaited

Read the following text carefully. As you read, consider the author's perspective on technological progress and bioethics.

Empathy is at the heart of my practice. I don’t think that you really can – or indeed should – try to understand the ethics of something without emotions. It can easily be argued that such a focus on empathy might distract from a true rational understanding of the issues, but in fact that is exactly what I am aiming to do. Emotions are messy and they do get in the way of rational discourse – as they should. The empathetic nature of my work deliberately complicates the ideas. It is one thing to argue for/against cloning when it is just an intellectual issue. However, things change if you have a mother or son who might need it. I like to think that my work understands that the point at which ‘good’ becomes ‘bad’ does not stand still, which is why it is so difficult to find. Ethics are not set like morals, they have to be constantly negotiated. Bioethics are especially flexible, which makes them especially difficult. However, sometimes our feelings find a way through these difficulties, and we are able to create connections and bonds that defy the expectations of others. (by Patricia Piccinini)

How does Piccinini create empathy for artificial or hybrid beings through her sculptures?

How does our moral evaluation of biotechnology change when personal involvement comes into play? Example: Would you judge cloning differently if a loved one could benefit from it?

Should empathy play a role in scientific research?