The film Gattaca is set in the future, where DNA plays an important part in defining social class and genetic modification of people is common. Vincent, according to Brezina, Enrico, and Amelia, is born and conceived without the assistance of technology (338). Vincent is subjected to strong genetic prejudice and discrimination, resulting in the elimination of a congenital heart defect and physical dysfunctions of shortsightedness, as well as a lifetime of 30.4 years. As a result, the only way he can achieve his long-term goal of becoming an astronaut is to breach the law and impersonate a "legitimate" person with the necessary genetic advantage (Weinberger, Sara, and Dov 33). Throughout the movie individual(s) particularly, Vincent is ruled on based on the genetic code, but not the personality and ambition selected by the person. Brezina, Enrico, and Amelia assert that as an outcome of unethical matter of genetically production characters there is lying and discrimination/inequality (340). Thus, the dominant ethical issue all over the film is how Vincent should be judged from utilitarianism and Kantian views.
From the act of Utilitarianism, which states that is the paramount good for the largest number, the deed would be rendered unethical (Brezina, Enrico, and Amelia 339). Although making the judgment on Vincent may cause gladness to the receiver, it inflicts pain to individuals who didn’t have the option as well as are "invalid" who are larger in number. However, from the Kantian ethics point of view, the judgment of Vincent in scene one would be unethical, this is because motivation factor is what substances, not the consequences. In the case, the parents were the only reasoning of the consequences perspective of possessing a perfect kid and their happiness. Consequently, because the child’s rights were dishonored; it owned no option to what occurred to its body. Besides, Weinberger, Sara, and Dov maintain that happiness should be centered on nature of human and starts from individual experience. Somebody whose genes are not modified could attain joy, by partaking goal and in Vincent's circumstance overpowering heart disease (32). Though, the entirely personal capability is disregarded once a human being is born perfect.
Subsequently, in scene two, Utilitarianism would note that the disregard to people, for instance, Vincent is unethical, since it resulted in extreme discomfort to a greater number of general public, and the pleasure to a chosen few (Weinberger, Sara, and Dov33). Similarly, according to Kantian ethics, the act is unethical, due to the categorical imperative (Brezina, Enrico, and Amelia 339). For example, Vincent is turned down grounded on the genetic code; this means that everyone who is not perfect would have to be turned down. Thus, trades would not last, since there is no person to work.
In view of Utilitarianism, the lying of Vincent would be regarded as ethical. In the process of lying, he produced no one pain but offered himself cheerfulness (Brezina, Enrico, and Amelia 340). As a result, the maximum good occurred to the highest number. According to Weinberger, Sara, and Dov perception, Kant may state that lying of Vincent would be unethical (34). Since when a person lies, he would be okay with everybody lying. As well because Vincent was simply in the viewpoint of the consequences of what he was undertaking, hence his intention was selfish.
In conclusion, Kant’s categorical imperative and the notion of utility is the best to consider in ethics in the movie. However, no ethical issue is resolved, even though Vincent was "held" he was capable of carrying on his vision to space; therefore, he not ever deals with evil consequences to lying. Despite the fact that Vincent is in space, discrimination and genetic engineering are still predominant as the film ends.
Work cited
R Brezina, Paul, Enrico Marinelli, and Amelia P Bailey. "Future Implications of Human Embryonic Testing and Modification: Great Medicine or GATTACA?." Current pharmaceutical biotechnology 17.4 (2016): 337-341
Weinberger, Sara, and Dov Greenbaum. "Genetic Technology to Prevent Disabilities: How Popular Culture Informs Our Understanding of the Use of Genetics to Define and Prevent Undesirable Traits." The American Journal of Bioethics 15.6 (2015): 32-34.
