In this blog post, we’ll explore how genetic design might influence social stratification, drawing on the movie ‘Gattaca’.
The movie ‘Gattaca’ depicts a world where people are born only with perfect genetic combinations. It tells the story of a protagonist—conceived naturally through his parents’ love—who overcomes discrimination despite facing it. The film is set in a future society where parents manipulate and modify their children’s DNA. This allows us to consider what problems might arise if genetic design were to become a reality. In the film, the protagonist—born through natural conception—is denied even the qualification to become an astronaut solely because of the potential for a genetic disease. Various studies on gene-editing technology are already underway, and while gene editing of human embryos is subject to strict regulations in most countries, the technology continues to advance. Opinions on genetic design are divided between supporters and opponents. Proponents cite the ability to prevent or treat genetic diseases as the greatest benefit. They also argue that the technology can be used not only for disease prevention but also to improve quality of life. On the other hand, opponents argue that the process of designing children according to their parents’ wishes could infringe upon the children’s autonomy. They also raise concerns that society could become stratified into those who have undergone genetic design and those who have not, and that children might experience confusion regarding their self-identity or that human diversity could diminish. While there are valid points in both sides of the argument, I believe the greatest concern is the potential for genetic design to exacerbate social stratification. Therefore, I believe we should not design a child’s genes recklessly. Let’s take a closer look at the issue of social stratification caused by genetic engineering.
In the movie ‘Gattaca’, there is significant discrimination between people born through genetic engineering and those conceived naturally. Some are excluded from key professions and relegated to the lower classes simply because their genes carry a potential risk of a specific disease. If such a society were to actually emerge, people born through genetic engineering would possess exceptional abilities in nearly every field, while those conceived naturally—not being genetically enhanced—would likely face entrenched disparities in ability from birth. In this scenario, the criteria distinguishing those who can access genetic engineering technology from those who cannot would ultimately come down to current wealth and power. Ultimately, if genetic engineering technology is monopolized by the wealthy and the social elite, society could become divided into two classes—much like the nobility and commoners of the Middle Ages—as generations pass. Furthermore, while variations in height were once accepted as part of human diversity, if genetic engineering becomes widespread, judgments will be made about which traits are “superior,” and discrimination based on these judgments could become even more overt.
In response to this, one might argue that invisible social stratification already exists today. The argument is that in a capitalist society, a class divide has formed between the wealthy and the less fortunate, and that it has already become a society where overcoming this divide is practically impossible. The disparity in living standards between the culture enjoyed by the wealthy and that of the general public—particularly those facing economic hardship—is vast, and this gap can be seen as creating a sense of alienation and making the class structure even more pronounced. People born into wealthy families can enjoy a high standard of cultural life, travel without financial burden, and even collect expensive cars or airplanes as hobbies. In contrast, those facing economic hardship may find themselves in situations where they must worry about their immediate livelihood. In the past, there were instances in some regions where parents opposed the children of the wealthy attending the same school as those from families living in public housing. Such cases serve as examples demonstrating that perceptions of social class are already deeply ingrained throughout society.
However, such arguments fail to sufficiently consider the distinction between social and biological factors. While environmental factors can be overcome to some extent through personal effort and changes in circumstances, biological factors are characteristics determined at birth and are difficult to overcome through willpower alone. Of course, it is not easy for someone facing economic hardship to become wealthy, but the possibility of achieving economic success through one’s own effort and ability does exist. There are cases where people have successfully started businesses based on good ideas, or where ventures launched with minimal capital have grown significantly; there are also examples of individuals who started as ordinary employees and went on to become CEOs of large corporations. These examples demonstrate that, even if environmental factors are difficult to overcome, opportunities do exist. In contrast, differences in biological factors are encoded in one’s DNA from birth and are therefore difficult for an individual to change on their own. Ultimately, the two cases differ in that there is a possibility of class becoming entrenched without even the opportunity to overcome genetic differences.
However, there are counterarguments to this claim. The argument is that biological factors are already at play even today. For example, it is argued that people who are financially well-off are relatively more likely to choose spouses with superior looks or abilities, and that if such choices are repeated, they can have a certain influence on the genetic characteristics of the next generation. In other words, economic factors can ultimately influence biological differences as well.
However, this counterargument also has its limitations. Since genes are not simply passed down as the exact traits of the parents but are determined through various genetic combinations, children born to tall, attractive, and highly intelligent parents do not necessarily inherit all of those same traits. Furthermore, as exemplified by cases where individuals who started as ordinary office workers went on to become CEOs of large corporations or successful entrepreneurs, economic success can be achieved entirely through acquired effort. Even if it is true that a wealthy person is more likely to marry a spouse with outstanding physical appearance or physical attributes—and thus have children who possess those traits—this remains, at the end of the day, a matter of probability. However, in a society where genetic design is possible, it becomes feasible to intentionally engineer various abilities, such as intelligence, susceptibility to disease, physical fitness, and artistic sensibility. Consequently, social stratification based on biological factors is likely to become far more entrenched—and a structure far more difficult for individuals to overcome—than stratification resulting from acquired factors.
There is still much debate over whether parents should be allowed to design their children’s genes. However, I believe parents should not design their children’s genes recklessly. The reason is that genetic engineering could create a new social class divide between those whose genes have been engineered and those whose have not. The primary counterargument to this is that social stratification already exists in modern society. However, upon reflection, social stratification resulting from environmental factors can potentially be overcome through individual effort and social opportunities. In contrast, stratification resulting from biological factors stems from differences in DNA itself, which create disparities in ability; therefore, the opportunities to overcome or transcend such stratification may be extremely limited. From this perspective, we must carefully consider the possibility that genetic engineering could further entrench social stratification and exacerbate inequality.
