By the time you are reading this, many of us—myself included—are (or soon will be) in full “withdrawal” mode from the “high” of yesterday’s Super Bowl. We were amazed by the awesome displays of athletic prowess on the field and caught up in the drama of watching this year’s AFC and NFC champions battle it out to the very end for the right to be called “Super Bowl champions”—the very best in the game of football, at least for a short while. Who could not have been impressed by the on-field exploits of Joe Flacco, Ray Rice, Jacoby Jones, and Colin Kaepernick? Who could not have been touched by the soaring notes of Jennifer Hudson singing “God Bess America,” or the soulful tones of Alicia Keyes singing the national anthem?
In similar fashion, we find ourselves fascinated by the accomplishment of Olympic athletes, musicians, artists, intellectuals, and others at the “top of their game,” or their art, or their craft.
Truly, these are specimens of excellence—indeed, one might say, of a certain kind of “perfection.”
Or are they?
Perhaps these NFL players, “great” as they already are, could in fact be more than what they are now—faster, stronger, more agile, more powerful. Wouldn’t that be good for the game? Wouldn’t that make the game even more exciting, more engaging, more thrilling?
Suppose, by way of a taking a pill or getting an injection—Human Growth Hormone (HGH), for example—football players could develop stronger muscles and greater physical stamina. Would we want them to do so? Would we consider their resulting on-field performances as genuine reflections of their actual athletic abilities, or more akin to “cheating the system”?
Suppose, more generally, that we “mere mortals”—those of us who are not Super Bowl champions, famous musicians, acclaimed scholars, or Nobel prize-winning scientists—could take a pill that would improve our memory, make us more intelligent, or help us feel more confident? Would this be a good thing?
And, finally, suppose we could alter the human genetic code permanently, through genetic engineering, either to eliminate unwanted conditions (diseases, genetic disorders, and so forth) or to enhance certain desired, genetically-linked traits (intelligence or sociability, for example). Should we avail ourselves of such opportunities?
In the wake of the Human Genome Project and other scientific breakthroughs, each of these scenarios is increasingly moving from the realm of “science fiction” to “reality,” a fact that should prompt us to ask—and reflect upon—a number of important philosophical and theological questions, among them the following:
- What does it mean to be an “excellent” specimen of something (a book, a table, a human being)?
- What does it mean to “flourish” as a human being?
- Should we seek to “enhance” ourselves? If so, are there limits to how far we should go in pursuing enhancement?
- What, if anything, is the value in human limitation? Are there limits that we should never seek to surpass?
In subsequent posts, we will explore some of the issues surrounding enhancement (genetic and otherwise). For the moment, as we bask in the afterglow of this year’s Super Bowl, it is worth taking a few moments to reflect on just what it is about “great” athletic, musical, intellectual and other human achievements that we find so appealing, and whether “enhancement” would render those accomplishments more or less so.
 The NFL is reportedly looking seriously at introducing HGH testing prior to the start of the 2013 season. See http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000133761/article/goodell-confident-hgh-testing-in-place-by-next-season