Technology evolves at a dazzling speed, and nowhere more so than in the
field of genetic engineering, where the possibility of directly changing
the genes of one's children is quickly becoming a reality. The public is
rightly concerned, but interestingly, they have not had much to say
about the implications of recent advancements in human genetics.
Playing God? asks why and explores the social forces that have led to
the thinning out of public debate over human genetic engineering. John
H. Evans contends that the problem lies in the structure of the debate
itself. Disputes over human genetic engineering concern the means for
achieving assumed ends, rather than being a healthy discussion about the
ends themselves. According to Evans, this change in focus occurred as
the jurisdiction over the debate shifted from scientists to
bioethicists, a change which itself was caused by the rise of the
bureaucratic state as the authority in such matters. The implications of
this timely study are twofold. Evans not only explores how decisions
about the ethics of human genetic engineering are made, but also shows
how the structure of the debate has led to the technological choices we
now face.