Analysis of GATTACA Film by Andrew Nicol and Ethics Poem by Pastan - Essay Example

?First Prompt In the film GATTACA, the is driven by a determinism that is based on genetics. Humans are expected to take a specific role in society based on their genetic profiles. The state has decided that genetics make some people better and more capable than others, and social roles are assigned on this basis. There is an implied contract that everyone will accept his or her role and fall into place. The implied contract is similar to that described by Socrates in Plato’s Crito, which is defined as an acceptance of the definition of justice that state has ordered, characterized by the subject’s willingness to remain in the state. Specifically, Socrates writes the following: [H]e who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and administer the State, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do as we command him. He claims that those who do not obey commands are unjust because they have accepted parental training and education from the state. If they fail to convince the state otherwise, disobedience itself is a kind of crime against the state. Taking this definition on its surface, the character of Vincent Anton Freeman in GATTACA can be shown to violate his contract with the state by trying to rise above his genetically prescribed circumstances. There are many different examples available to show that Vincent refuses to accept his lot in the society of GATTACA. Three such examples will be shown here. First, from his early childhood, Vincent competes against his brother Anton in swimming contests. They swim out to sea and see which one gives up first and swims back. In these early contests, Vincent loses to his brother due to his brother’s superior genetic make-up. However, he continues trying to beat his brother rather than accepting this outcome. In the end, he learns to beat his brother by using all his strength to swim out, not saving anything for the swim back. In this example, he learns that his will can overcome his genetic destiny. Exercising this, he violates his supposed understanding with the state. Second, Vincent decides he wants to become an elite astronaut. In this choice, he also violates his implied contract, which should require him to accept a menial job not afforded those without superior genetics. In the mere decision to attempt to become more than is available to him, Vincent goes against the deterministic direction the state tells him he should accept. While one could make the argument that by attempting to leave earth and go to the stars, Vincent is in fact “leaving” the state, the fact that he uses state space programs in order to achieve his dreams of becoming more indicates that he has accepted the state’s material conditions without accepting its moral dictates. Third, and finally, the fact that Vincent uses deception to achieve his dream of becoming an astronaut shows that he violates his contract. He steals DNA from a person with a “superior” profile and uses this to impersonate a different identity. He even undergoes surgery to make himself taller, so that he won’t be detected. In doing this, he shows that, on one hand, he is willing to live within the state’s expectations, but on the other he does not accept its ultimate ordering of justice. He deceives the state while accepting the benefits that it affords him as he lives under that deception. GATTACA, in the end, poses questions about the justice of a state that is formed on genetic determinism. However, it is also an example of a citizen acting within such a state in a way that is, contractually speaking, unjust. By using the state for his own private ends, Vincent can be said to be unjust, in view of Socrates’ definition. The fact that we pull for him forces us to ask questions about this social contract and about the nature of justice generally. Second Prompt In her poem, “Ethics” Linda Pastan defines a situation in which a person must choose between saving a classic painting and another, older human being. She considers this question in light of her role as a young woman, only to reconsider it later by placing herself in the role of the older woman who would be saved. In doing so, she states a kind of summary of moral relativism. Would her decision be different if the person to be saved were known or unknown to her? Alternatively, would it matter if the painting were one she liked or disliked? If we take as a fundamental assumption that life is sacred, we may wish to define such a situation as one in which the person should always be saved. However, in a scenario in which I was faced with such a decision, to save, for example an old man at the end of his life or the original (and only existing version) of the Mona Lisa, the decision would be difficult. First, there is the matter that the painting has inspired great thought and humanity throughout centuries. It has inspired millions and is culturally important, if only as a historical record of advances in art. Second, there is the matter that the person’s life is at stake and we have defined the fundamental guiding principle in such a way that life is sacred. If I were given to moral absolutism, the decision would be simple. Even if my neighbor encouraged me to take the painting, I would be compelled by the moral directive to take the man first. There is no need to weigh the value of his life or the connection or empathy I may or may not have with him. Life is sacred. That is all I need to know. However, if I were given to moral relativism, I would have to weigh, and quickly, the decision based on a number of factors. First, does the value of the man’s life and the expectancy for his future seem enough to risk losing a classic symbol of humanism and a work of recognized genius? Second, does the encouragement of my neighbor to take the painting weigh in such a manner to compel me to abandon a fellow human in distress? Many other considerations also must be weighed. Would I want to be saved in his place? Would it matter if he wanted to be saved or not? Would it matter if I knew him or not? Such questions are important in the universe of moral relativism because they present various forms of balancing that must be done against generally conceived principles before an action can be taken. Moral relativism asks me to act in such a way that my principles align generally with the conditions in which I find myself. I appreciate art and the value of classic painting. I understand the historical significance of the Mona Lisa. I also love my fellow man, and I would likely want someone to save me in such a case. I understand the severity of my choice, since either the man or the painting will be lost forever. The fact that my neighbor weighs in favor of the painting’s salvation impacts me. I recognize that in some ways the painting is more valuable to humanity in the long run, and the opinion of my neighbor is important in the immediate. However, my principles also state that life is sacred. Should this principle not trump other considerations? Pastan’s poem seems to indicate that the question almost becomes mute from the point of the view of the older person. She states that as an older woman reconsidering the question she realizes that she and the painting are one and that both are beyond saving “by children.” This implies that such decisions are made easier with experience and time. As a young person, one weighs the many different moral implications (using relativism), or one acts out of stated principles (using absolutism). However, it is likely that the question of whether to save the man or the painting not only changes depending on which ethical framework is used, it also changes depending on where I am in my moral history when I make the decision. For now, I would act against the principle and save the painting. References GATTACA. Andrew Nicol, director. Columbia Pictures, 1997. Pastan, Linda. “Ethics.” [online] Accessed October 17, 2011, from http://mareeblogblogblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/ethics-linda-pastan-in-ethics-class-so.html. Plato. Crito. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. [online] Accessed October 17, 2011, from http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html. Read More