Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics

Leon Kass is a wise and humane thinker. As a physician and as a moral philosopher he is uniquely qualified to deal with the issues being raised by the latest biotechnological developments. His concern is to preserve the freedom and dignity of humanity, against the unthinking onslaught of the ' improvements ' that may destroy us. It seems to me that his goal is admirable and his arguments strong, but that the marketplace of technological one up-man-ship and human pride greed and ambition will not prevent many different kinds of ' progress' for a few that will be detrimental to all. Even if Kass were to succeed within the United States in restraining certain kinds of research, there would be no stopping teams of researchers elsewhere who would for profit and glory produce ' designer babies' and ' new forms of machine- man hybrid life' and ' indefinitely long - lifed human beings' and countless other developments which again might seem beneficial for a few but which will be detrimental to our common humanity. Kass is a clear and convincing writer in discussing a whole host of issues in regard to what we may do to ourselves in our laboratory future. This book is highly recommended if only because it will enrich the reader's sense of what is presently at stake, and what might possibly be done to make us more human not less

It is just as easy to dismiss Kass, now head of the President's Council for Bioethics, as a "technophobe" searching for justification. The opposite is true: while the groundwork for modern bio-deontological thought is firmly in place in the writings of the founding bioethical and environmental scholars, such writings are largely unapproachable to the layperson, analytic rather than continental in approach.Kass does just the opposite. In the spirit of CS Lewis and his "The Abolition of Man," which Kass references, Kass paints a clear and understandable picture, suitable as an introduction to the subject. However, such a statement is misleading: the book is by no means just an introduction. Simply, Kass sets out to synthesize a workable and, more importantly, objective ethos that is not simply "ivory-tower," but applicable in day-to-day functioning. That such a book is coherant and pleasurable to read is simply icing on the cake.

The rapid growth in biotechnology has seen a corresponding growth in bioethics. Unfortunately, however, many bio-ethicists have become handmaidens to Big Biotech. The twin towers of technology and money have led many to abandon genuine independent ethical reflection. There have been too few voices to assess the latest trends in biotechnology in a wise, discerning and prudent manner.One person who has done so is biologist and philosopher Leon Kass of the University of Chicago. He has spend a lifetime thinking about, and writing on, the new reproductive technologies and the challenges they present. And he has done so always with a view to the implications for human dignity and freedom. This volume, which includes articles which have appeared elsewhere, contains of wealth of information and ethical reflection on the new technologies.All the major issues are covered here: cloning and stem cell research, IVF and assisted reproductive technologies, the new genetics, euthanasia and end of life decisions, and other recent developments in biotechnology.Also carefully discussed are the hard questions: What is the moral status of the human embryo? Should there be limits to where we are heading in biology and technology? Are there areas of mystery in life that science should simply leave alone? Should autonomy, and the modern concept of human rights, trump other social and community concerns? What is the nature of medicine and what are its goals? These and other important ethical concerns are all given wise and careful consideration.Kass examines the relationship between liberal democracies and the new technologies, for example, offering incisive and cautious reflection. He notes how democracies help create a climate which makes possible the growth of science and technology. But he also warns that without a moral vision of how that technology should proceed, there is the danger of commercial interests and utopian schemes derailing the science into undemocratic ends.Indeed, since the time of the Enlightenment, an overly rationalist and utopian dream of the perfectibility of man has been pursued, often with disastrous consequences. Only by continually affirming the mystery and sacredness of life, and the dignity and wonder of man, can we prevent such coercive utopianism.However, as Kass so clearly points out, the real threat is not coercive utopianism, but well-intentioned utopianism. That is, the real dangers come from those who speak of compassion, the relief of suffering and the battle for immortality. Says Kass, "the benevolent uses of humanitarian technologies often have serious unintended and undesired consequences." The promises of the relief of all suffering and the extension of life may sound pleasing to the ears, but can in fact bring bitterness to the soul.Lost in the discussions of overcoming all problems and eradicating all unhealthiness, is the concept of the human person, of human dignity. To what end should we strive for immortality? What bene

I fail to see how Sherman Durfee's rant qualifies as a book review as there seems to be no mention of the actual text. I'd like to address Mr. Durfee's concerns and then discuss the book.Dr. Kass is an MD by training. He then went on to become a Professor at the U of Chicago with the Department of Social Thought (not a lecturer). While at the U of C, I never once saw him "prancing around," though he did once have a book signing - which seems normal for people who do things like, say, write books. His views would be considered by most to be conservative and thus "right-wing" since to people such as Durfee, the two are exactly the same. His views are thoughtful, though, and should be considered by anyone with an open mind. I imagine Dr. Kass has had to discuss his views with patients who suffer from neurologic diseases and doubt that he has any difficulty doing so. As a pathologist who sees all the horrible cases a hospital has while interacting with many scientists, I don't find it difficult to tell people certain treatments are morally wrong, and I have no where near the intellectual fortitude of Dr. Kass. Finally, I doubt if Dr. Kass works any less hard than Mr. Durfee's scientists who are "working overtime" and "toiling hours away." Mr. Durfee is either a scientist with an over-inflated idea of himself or an idealogue who has no idea how hard or why most scientists work. Mr. Durfee's biggest complaint is that the book has somehow insulted him. He has obviously not read it and instead insults anyone who might question the use of the sick and dying to justify all methods of scientific research.Like his previous books, this book is timely and well-written. It is accessible to most people (who actually take the time to read it). It provides cogent arguments against some methods that many have come to agree with for the sake of the sick. It should be read by anyone who believes that the means are not always justified by the end and who is open to intellectual argument.

This is a book that anyone worried about the brave new world that awaits us ought to read. Kass is heads and shoulders above all the others who have written about the dilemmas of bioethics. He has a certain reassuring melancholy in the face of all the febrile assurances that we are entering a paradise of longevity and health through stem cells. He shows that the subject of bioethics cannot be approached without a strong understanding that by toying with God's creation we are arrogating to ourselves the power of God--and that, since the Greeks, has been a prescription for disaster.