Brave New Worlds: Staying Human in the Genetic Future (Hardcover)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

Bryan Appleyard doesn't really have much new to say about the future of human society in the face of genetic science advances, but he states his arguments simply, precisely, and quickly. In fact, Appleyard's main purpose seems simply to be a call for awareness. In a time where new discoveries about DNA and human biochemistry come fast and furious, Appleyard preaches vigilance, lest we end up with the genetic equivalent of the atom bomb--which is a perfect example, he says, of what naive scientists will do when their knowledge is unchecked by society. His main points are that scientific knowledge is not (and probably has never been) morally neutral, despite the protestations of well-meaning advocates of science; that new developments are not always good; that genetic screening and abortion as currently practiced are eugenics; and that the practice of eugenics, no matter how well disguised, will lead us to a future that looks disturbingly like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. We must decide for ourselves what we want before science and politics decide for us, says Appleyard. This short book is bound to anger scientists, religious leaders, and people on both ends of the left-right political spectrum--Appleyard no doubt hopes it will get people talking about the "scientific juggernaut" of genetics. Brave New Worlds will also give readers a quick, anxious overview of the state of genetics-research policy in the wake of the first successful adult mammalian clone and the Human Genome Project, and plenty of food for thought about what it is to be human. --Therese Littleton

From Publishers Weekly

In a less-than-subtle anti-science polemic, London Times columnist Appleyard (Understanding the Present) addresses some of the myriad ramifications of our expanding knowledge of genetics. "Concealed within the knowledge we are now acquiring are insights that may be profoundly socially divisive and which could overthrow the basis on which the wealth and stability of Western democracies are constructed," is one of his many pronouncements. Appleyard adequately explores some of the obvious ethical implications sure to be present in a future in which our genetic makeups are known to all and possibly open to manipulation: selective abortion of fetuses not to the liking of prospective parents; the refusal of insurance companies to cover individuals with genetic predispositions for certain disorders; the inevitable quagmire in the criminal justice system when criminals argue that their genes forced them to act in an antisocial manner. His main point, however, is that the social implications of science are far too important to be left solely to the scientists. But try as he might to whip this thesis into a controversy, most readers will find it a straw man, as few scientists disagree with Appleyard's view. There are many, however, who would argue strenuously with his overly simplified attacks on scientists and the scientific method?for example, that "[i]n order to become scientific, we must become inhuman." Try telling that to Einstein, Tagore or Bohm.--n order to become scientific, we must become inhuman." Try telling that to Einstein, Tagore or Bohm.
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 224 pages
• Publisher: Viking Adult; 1 edition (August 1, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0670869899
• ISBN-13: 978-0670869893
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,996,738 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

9 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent antidote to Dawkins and E O Wilson, February 8, 1999

By A Customer

Appleyard writes in a clear concise style and knows his subject extremely well.

Although not a scientist he doesn't hesitate to take on the high priests of scientism, asking how many times before science has claimed to have the answer to everything, and how many times before has it been proved wrong.

His main thrust however is that lay people need to question scientists and take responsibility for the use of new discoveries. Taking the cloning of Dolly the sheep as his starting point he forecasts the likely effects unquestioning acceptance of the use of such techniques will have on human reproduction; suggesting that without realising it we could be heading for a new type of eugenics, just as immoral as the terrible experiments the world has seen in the past.