Moral Relativism in the movie Gattaca - Essay Example

Moral Relativism in the movie Gattaca and choose a character Character chosen: Vincent Anton Freeman The appropriate application of the definition of moral relativism in the movie Gatta is the Metaethical moral relativism which states that “the truth or falsity of moral judgments, or their justification, is not absolute or universal, but is relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of persons (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2009). Simply put, the metaethical definition of relativism is that the standard of morality, ethics and the determination of right and wrong are based on culture, norms and traditions and is therefore subjective and can be subjected to an individual’s choice and interpretation. In the movie Gattaca, Vincent Anton Freeman was moral relativist because he did not subscribe to the established rules by Gattaca that a man’s success is determined by genetics alone. 3 examples to support thesis Example 1 The moral relativist attitude was best exemplified by Vincent Anton Freeman in the movie Gattaca because he did not subscribe to the prevailing notion in Gattaca’s genetic determinist society that a person’s capacity and chance to success is solely defined by one’s genetic predisposition. His acts were a clear defiance against a society that placed premium on a person’s genetic make-up as he proved that he can be better than those who have a better genetic disposition than him. To illustrate this, Vincent beat his brother Anton in their swimming competition. Anton was supposed to be stronger than Vincent because of his better genetic make-up yet Vincent beat him. To emphasize that will and determination can beat genetics, Vincent even saved Anton from drowning in the said swimming competition. Example 2 Vincent Freeman was not intimidated by the genetic requirement of being an astronaut. He thought that it is not fair that man will be deprived of his chance to do what he what want out of his life just because of his in-valid genes. So he used Jerome Eugene Morrow’s genetic ID, a swimming star who has an excellent genetic profile but turn invalid. That provided him access to the Gattaca Aerospace Corporation and became an astronaut because his “borrowed” genetic I.D. was coupled with Vincent’s determination. The irony of the circumstances is that Jerome was not able to translate his excellent genetic profile to a real achievement who only won silver in a swimming competition. Yet, Vincent made the most out of it despite of his seemingly “inept” genetic structure. Example 3 Vincent Freeman did not believe that genetics determine a romantic compatibility in a relationship. His relationship with Irene Cassini proves that he does not subscribe to the convention that genetic in-valids cannot be with somebody who has a better genetic disposition. In the first place, genetics has no place in a romantic relationship whose goal is for two people to be happy together and to provide love and support to each partner. Conclusion The movie Gattaca depicts high-technology discrimination where society’s preference and opportunities in life is genetically determined. Not so long ago, this kind of discrimination also exists, only that the segregation was more obvious but it still involves a person genetic make-up; that is the color of his skin through racial discrimination. An unjust societal structure that upholds injustice and unfairness cannot perpetuate for a long time because there will always be somebody who is a “moral relativist” who will go against its established norms. Any society whose established rules of morals and ethics segregate a man from another because of a genetic predisposition will definitely invite a “moral relativist” to challenge it. As what had happened before with any discriminatory practices such as racial discrimination, moral relativist or crusaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King challenged the prevailing norm that man should be judged by his character and not by the color of his skin. In Gattaca’s case, the moral relativity that is founded more on a solid moral ground is the idea that every man should be given a chance in life whose success should depend on its own will, determination and character and not by his genetic disposition. 2. The Mona Lisa scenario: Whether to save a man’s life or save the precious painting. My choice would be that of moral relativist not to follow the urging of my peers to save the painting because of its apparent value. True, the Mona Lisa is a product of man’s genius and cannot be replicated. There may be no longer a painting that can be painted as exquisite as Mona Lisa. But I will choose to save the man’s life against the urging of my peers to save the painting. I will choose to save a man’s life because a human life is more important than any articles of art no matter how important or exquisite it is. Art, is just a product of man’s genius and its source is man’s ingenuity. Having that perspective in mind, I will value the creator more, which is man than the creation which is the painting. The man that I will be saving may not be an artist or may not be capable to any work of genius that will be cherished by mankind. But it is not this man that I will be saving that I value more but the idea that “man” himself” is more important than any of its artistic product. I subscribe to this idea because it would be dangerous for society to adapt a kind of attitude and mentality that will forgo life every time something valuable needs to be saved. I believe that any work of genius can be replicated and even be bettered for as long as man exists. For genius and artistry is always with him. Protect and preserve that he many continue to produce artistic articles that mankind can behold. In contrast, if society will put more importance to his artistic by product than the creator himself that would create a general attitude that man is dispensable while his works are not. Man and human life is just more important than any product of his genius. Reference: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2009). Moral relativism. Online. Available at Accessed on November 18, 2011. Read More