Need an argumentative essay on To analyze Michael Sandel's argument in The Case against Perfection and make and argue a claim about it. Needs to be 5 pages. Please no plagiarism.Download file to see p

Need an argumentative essay on To analyze Michael Sandel's argument in The Case against Perfection and make and argue a claim about it. Needs to be 5 pages. Please no plagiarism.

Enhancements are furthermore self-defeating to the human appreciation of natural abilities and the cultivation of talents in his view. Sandel argues that human appreciation of life comes from the fact that there is an unequal, apparently random gift of talents, advantages, and disadvantages in the social context that makes life meaningful through patterns of difference. He holds that inequalities in natural ability and skill that make some unfortunate and others lucky allow people to be compassionate, as there is an equally likely chance that they would have had the same fate. When genetic enhancements diminish the differences in talent, Sandel states that the individual’s success depends solely on whether or not the person has made the right decision ethically, and through this personal “responsibility expands to daunting proportions.” (Sandel, 87) In criticism, it is difficult to reconcile the arguments of Sandel against genetic engineering when deconstructing the logic he uses with regard to pharmaceutical medications such as the use of Ritalin to improve academic performance. Since Ritalin does not affect the apparent telos of academic performance and focuses all of one’s learning ability, reducing contingencies unrelated to education or healing the mind of ADD, it is not clear why does Sandel not regard it in the same manner as he does running shoes. Furthermore, in his “Chariots of Fire” example, even Sandel concedes that finding the exact telos for personal interpretation within a complex system of competing philosophies is sometimes difficult for the individual and subjective. Thus, the telos of an action may be very different in the views of different people. In this example, Sandel is rejecting Ritalin not on the logic of telos as related to healing but on the preservation of inequality as he defines the morality. Because, in his view, only the differences among people allow them to appreciate life, and due to the ambiguity of telos as he defines it with subjective bias and interpretation at its root, Sandel’s argument against genetic engineering is less about telos and perfection and more a case against equality in society when assisted by technology. The logic of this argument is not consistent with the evolutionary changes of human consciousness, nor does it represent the new paradigm of human civilization represented by the Information Age. Sandel titles his book “The Case Against Perfection” in order to show his stance against the “Promethean aspiration to remake” human nature. (Sandel, 26) He argues for a concept of the giftedness of life opposed to genetic enhancements by stating that as people begin to enhance themselves to the limits of engineering, the variability in human talents decrease collectively and the playing field is leveled. Though it is important to note that differences between the choices that people make still exist, “we [would] attribute less to chance and more to choice,” and personal responsibility would increase to daunting proportions as people become ethically and morally responsible for every aspect of their lives. (Sandel, 87) Yet even though he fears that genetic enhancements would position too much pressure on the individual’s decisions, Sandel is fully in support of healing the unfortunate. The problem lies in that allowing the healing of the unfortunate implies that same normalization of abilities that enhancement does.