|
||||
  
 
 |
Religion, Marxism and the human genome: Are we playing God? By
Leon D'souza
Science and religion have long been wastrel sons of the same father. Born of human imperfection, they have squabbled, sometimes mindlessly, and incessantly, over their legitimacy. For centuries, they have endeavored to explain the mysteries of life. They have together, shaped social consciousness and envenomed us by fabricating the societal cleavages that acerbate human tensions. Science has always been the more nonconformist and contumacious of the two. So it comes as no surprise when scientists attempt to speak the language of God by deciphering the genetic code. On June 26, scientists published the first rough draft of the completed sequence of the human genome, our genetic "instruction book." A 'genome' is all the DNA in an organism, including its genes. Science has revealed that the differences between two unrelated individuals, between your next-door neighbor and Albert Einstein, may reflect a mere handful of differences in their genomic recipes -- perhaps one altered word in 500. We are but one step away from making possible the writing of a genomic "cookbook." Some are already asking the question implicit in this scientific milestone, are we playing God? Indeed, the incredible success of the Human Genome Project represents a giant leap in demystifying the evolution of the human species. It serves to vindicate the scientific viewpoint in the long-drawn debate on the origins of life. Scientists have revealed that DNA has a very complex structure that is largely made up of "junk" DNA. Most of the genome does not code for any proteins at all, and consequently has no apparent function. Genes for proteins have other genes, located on other chromosomes, to turn them on and off. Scientists argue that such an abstruse condition can only be fathomed as a product of humanity's long evolutionary history. Some members of the scientific community suggest sardonically that if the human genome is really God's "instruction book," then it is not very well written. An astute designer would never have written such a convoluted set of instructions that are so difficult to read, they contend. Even Dr. Francis Collins, head of the National Human Genome Research Institute and a devout Christian who famously invoked God at the White House press conference announcing the success of the project, much to the chagrin of the scientific community, maintains that the evidence for natural selection is overwhelming. In his own words, "Creationism has done more harm to serious notions of belief than anything in modern history." Trustees of faith and religion argue that the endurance of faith is itself a corroboration of its reality. Superstitions have not withstood the test of time and the onslaught of scientific questioning. Thus, it is flawed to suggest that religion is nothing but a backward form of social consciousness, they insist. Such reasoning has found favor in some quarters of the scientific community as well. Many scientists agree that the rush to attribute everything to DNA is indubitably ludicrous. Marxists debunk the religious argument suggesting that religious ideas have endured only because of man's failure to consciously master his own social organization. Leon Trotsky, a Bolshevik leader, wrote in Literature and Revolution, that "so long as man will not have mastered his social organization, the latter will hang over him as his fate. Whether at the same time society casts a religious shadow or not is a secondary matter and depends upon the degree of man's helplessness." They contend that when society is reconstructed on a more sagacious, humanizing, and egalitarian basis, religion will naturally perish. The human genome has taught us that we are far more alike than we are different. What implications does this have for the social order? Would reconstructing society along Marxist lines be more probable with our new knowledge? If this reconstruction were to occur, what impact would it have on religion? The decoding of the human genome represents a magnificent scientific breakthrough. It will enable us to understand the causes of genetic disorders, and improve the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of diseases. However, this landmark accomplishment of modern science has important consequences for religion and other social norms. Will this new branch of science weaken religious beliefs? Or will it serve to substantiate them by testifying to the amazing complexity of human design? Only time will tell.
|
Archived Months:
January
1999 January
2000 January 2001 |
||