Chapter Five: Conservatism and Enhancement In chapter five of Allen Buchanan’s book, Beyond Humanity? He attempts to cover the concerns that conservatives have on genetic enhancement. He argues that if conservatives believe that human nature (and cognition) is imperfect then there is room to suggest that we should be finding way to safely improve our cognitive abilities.
He begins with acknowledging the opposition’s concern for the topic he further argues in chapter five where he draws on the idea that traditional conservatives are somewhat naïve and that one of their major concerns date back to pre-Darwinian “revolution in biology” (p148). He further goes onto pointing out the holes in Conservative’s argument and the fact that some of them “use and abuse… the idea of human …show more content…
Then Buchanan mentions the term of a ‘Master Engineer’ and argues that “no type of organism is stable,” and that the idea is “entirely inapplicable,” he goes onto the analogy of the watchmaker; this one with a specific design in mind and highly detailed, for that matter. He then refers to Richard Dawkins’ analogy of a ‘blind watchmaker’; this one with no specific design in mind, but creates something extraordinary even in their blindness (p156). Buchanan argues for the next several paragraphs against the Master engineer’s attention to detail and how even in adaptation (as presented by Darwin) there are still “poor biological design” (p157). From where I see it, Buchanan seems to be suggesting that nature is not (or has not) been doing that great of a job in adapting human beings fast enough to surpass biological blunders such as lower back pain, the dual function of the pharynx, and the inability for humans to biosynthesize vitamin C, as he listed. Therefore, leading
He begins with acknowledging the opposition’s concern for the topic he further argues in chapter five where he draws on the idea that traditional conservatives are somewhat naïve and that one of their major concerns date back to pre-Darwinian “revolution in biology” (p148). He further goes onto pointing out the holes in Conservative’s argument and the fact that some of them “use and abuse… the idea of human …show more content…
Then Buchanan mentions the term of a ‘Master Engineer’ and argues that “no type of organism is stable,” and that the idea is “entirely inapplicable,” he goes onto the analogy of the watchmaker; this one with a specific design in mind and highly detailed, for that matter. He then refers to Richard Dawkins’ analogy of a ‘blind watchmaker’; this one with no specific design in mind, but creates something extraordinary even in their blindness (p156). Buchanan argues for the next several paragraphs against the Master engineer’s attention to detail and how even in adaptation (as presented by Darwin) there are still “poor biological design” (p157). From where I see it, Buchanan seems to be suggesting that nature is not (or has not) been doing that great of a job in adapting human beings fast enough to surpass biological blunders such as lower back pain, the dual function of the pharynx, and the inability for humans to biosynthesize vitamin C, as he listed. Therefore, leading