Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Essay: Animals and Machines

One overlying theme in Life Extreme is change. Through quotes, Kac and Ronell seem to state that nothing is permanent, and everything is bound to change. Applied to animals and genetics, the authors seem to state that we cannot simply ignore the issues of genetic hybridization. However, it is not immediately apparent which stance the authors take on the issue. I think that their primary tactic is to educate the reader about what the hell is going on in the world of scientifically induced evolution. For me, this is exactly what I needed to know. I had no clue that a lot of this was going on. I won’t say that I’m opposed to it, but I feel like I don’t really know anything about the current state of genetic science.
The authors often seemed to choose examples of small scientific victories. However I think that the examples they chose are ones that one day may have huge implications. Many of the experiments outlined in Life Extreme seem to be the kind that open doors for scientists to better manipulate the natural world. The image of the mouse with an ear on its back comes to mind. Even though the ear can’t hear yet, it demonstrates that mice are capable of housing human organs. This discovery doesn’t actually do anything yet, but the future implications could be immense.
The fat naked chickens in Life Extreme are an example of an advance in science that has immediate applications. These chickens are ripe for the plunder, defenseless and vulnerable. The manipulation of these animals for our benefit raises the ethical question: should humans be allowed to use animals as machines for their benefit? Humans are undeniably at the top of the food chain, but we are not gods. Is this too much?
While blogging about Leotard’s Postmodern Fable, I discussed the possibility that life is just a complex form of organizing energy*. If this were true, are life forms machines? Webster’s dictionary defines a machine as: Any combination of parts for utilizing, modifying, applying, or transmitting energy, performing a specific function, etc. Wait a sec, transmitting energy? That’s what I blogged about. So if animal and plant life is “designed” to transmit energy, that makes them machines right? It could make sense. Let’s say that someone or something is tasked to create an energy cycle that creates, manipulates, and stores energy. Their cycle must be self-reliant, and it must last for as long as possible. With this imaginary scenario, one potential solution is animal and plant life. With inputs of just sunlight and basic minerals, animals and plants create a life cycle based on energy. Thus, they have potential to be considered machines.
In Life Extreme, Kac and Ronell declare that the rules of the game are changing. The genetic experiments in the book demonstrate that animals, like any machines, can be redesigned. Up until the last 400 years, humans have had no intentional impact on the genetics and structure of animals and plants, and only until the last fifty years have these changes become significant. With science, humans have become able to redesign the genetics of animals and change them to suit our purposes. We have begun to figure out the code of the machines, and assume the role of designers. However, here is where we run into ethical problems.
Humans must ask themselves a critical question: are animals our machines? If animals are machines they must have been created by someone or something. Nobody knows who made these machines, but it is apparent that humans did not. For this reason, I suggest that we should be very cautious while experimenting with genetic alterations.


*http://writingsmallthinkingbig.blogspot.com/2009/01/energy-and-otherness.html#comments

1 comment:

  1. Another complex answer--I greatly appreciate how you use your blog entries.

    ReplyDelete