If there is a world where people are programmed with desired responses and their future is chosen for them, is that a world worth living in? Jenna Fox is a seventeen-year-old girl who lives in that world, a survivor of a horrible accident that results in her mind being uploaded along with her parents’ programming into an artificially designed body. As she attempts to come to terms with who she is now, her struggles highlight the dangers and immorality of coding someone’s brain. While it is true that it could prevent people from making thoughtless decisions, it should not be done and should be considered unethical because it violates free will, it could limit a person’s future and opportunities, and it could result in adverse psychological effects.
…show more content…
Jenna points out, “I won’t even bring up the fact that I am two inches shorter now- acceptable ballerina height- another detail I know wasn’t an oversight,” (Pearson 137) when years earlier, she had told her mother, “I’m five-nine and still growing. I’m not prima ballerina material.” (Pearson 110) She shows that, before the accident, she disliked being a ballerina, and was glad that she was growing out of “acceptable ballerina height.” However, after the accident, her parents altered her height to their liking and implanted Jenna’s programming. If they were to command Jenna to become a ballerina, Jenna may be compelled to bend to their wishes, limiting her future career choices. In what ways it ethical to restrict a person’s …show more content…
Matthew Fox, Jenna’s father, admits to her that, “You’ve been through a terrible trauma, not unlike any other patient who has had a severe brain injury,” and later continues, saying, “Usually medication is used to lessen adverse effects. But medicine won’t work with you, Jenna. You don’t have the same circulatory system or nervous system of other brain injury patients.” His words suggest how dangerous it can be to tamper with someone’s brain, especially when they have sustained injuries. There will always be an unknown factor lurking around these programming procedures. What’s to prevent someone from becoming a vegetable or becoming brain-dead from botched programming? Not only is coding a person’s brain unethical, but it is highly risky, and thus should not be
Jenna points out, “I won’t even bring up the fact that I am two inches shorter now- acceptable ballerina height- another detail I know wasn’t an oversight,” (Pearson 137) when years earlier, she had told her mother, “I’m five-nine and still growing. I’m not prima ballerina material.” (Pearson 110) She shows that, before the accident, she disliked being a ballerina, and was glad that she was growing out of “acceptable ballerina height.” However, after the accident, her parents altered her height to their liking and implanted Jenna’s programming. If they were to command Jenna to become a ballerina, Jenna may be compelled to bend to their wishes, limiting her future career choices. In what ways it ethical to restrict a person’s …show more content…
Matthew Fox, Jenna’s father, admits to her that, “You’ve been through a terrible trauma, not unlike any other patient who has had a severe brain injury,” and later continues, saying, “Usually medication is used to lessen adverse effects. But medicine won’t work with you, Jenna. You don’t have the same circulatory system or nervous system of other brain injury patients.” His words suggest how dangerous it can be to tamper with someone’s brain, especially when they have sustained injuries. There will always be an unknown factor lurking around these programming procedures. What’s to prevent someone from becoming a vegetable or becoming brain-dead from botched programming? Not only is coding a person’s brain unethical, but it is highly risky, and thus should not be