Cinema in Learning about Genetic Manipulation through Science Fiction in Gattaca (1997)
Abstract Genetic manipulation has been one of the most rapidly developing branches of biotechnology over the last 20 years. With the advent of the CRISPR technique, the possibility of correcting, changing and deleting genes in a DNA sequence has become a scientific possibility. Film plots are often a realistic reflection of psychosocial aspects of the population, which can be used in educational settings to show the consequences of certain situations or moral dilemmas. From a didactic point of view, this study interprets the most significant sequences of the film Gattaca (1997), by Andrew Niccol, where, in a futuristic environment, a distinction is made between inferior human beings who have not been genetically treated and have low status functions, or superior human beings who have been genetically treated and are mainly destined for more important functions such as space travel. The main objective is to facilitate the understanding of concepts related to genetic manipulation, such as genetic determinism, eugenics or genetic discrimination, among others, after viewing and sharing this film.
- Referencias
- Cómo citar
- Del mismo autor
- Métricas
Miah A. Nanoethics, Science Communication, and a Fourth Model for Public Engagement. Nanoethics. 2017;11(2):139–352.
Sterckx S, Cockbain J, Howard HC, Borry P. «I prefer a child with…»: designer babies, another controversial patent in the arena of direct-to-consumer genomics. Genet. Med. 2013;15(12):923–944.
Kirby DA. The New Eugenics in Cinema: Genetic Determinism and Gene Therapy in GATTACA. Science Fiction Studies. 2000;27(2).
Cribbs AP, Perera SMW. Science and bioethics of CRISPR-CAS9 gene editing: An analysis towards separating facts and fiction. Yale J. Biol. Med. 2017;90(4):625-634.
Greene M, Master Z. Ethical Issues of Using CRISPR Technologies for Research on Military Enhancement. J Bioeth Inq. 2018;15(3):327–35.
Ingersoll EG, Asimov I, Gerald GF, Wolf J, Duberman J, Philmus R. A Conversation with Isaac Asimov. Science Fiction Studies. 1987 ;14(1):68–77.
Kirby D. Cinematic Science: The Public Communication of Science and Technology in Popular Film. In: Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology. 2008. p. 67–94.
Ternisien X. Nuevas fronteras de la ciencia-ficción. Revista Mensaje. 1996;45(447):45–48.
Menadue CB, Giselsson K, Guez D. An Empirical Revision of the Definition of Science Fiction: It Is All in the Techne. Sage Open. 2020;10(4).
Westfahl G. The mechanics of wonder: The creation of the idea of science fiction. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press; 1998.
Vidal F. Introduction: From «The Popularization of Science through Film» to «The Public Understanding of Science.» Sci. Context. 2018;31(1):1–14.
Science on film. Nature Phys. 5, 703 (2009).
Chapela A. Between fiction and science: The use of narrative in teaching science. Educ. Quim. [Internet]. 2014;25(1):2–6.
Rose CS. Biology in the Movies: Using the Double-Edged Sword of Popular Culture to Enhance Public Understanding of Science. Evol. Biol. 2007;34(1):49–54.
Cambra-Badii I, Guardiola E, Baños JE. Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus: a classic novel to stimulate the analysis of complex contemporary issues in biomedical sciences. BMC Med. Ethics. 2021;22(1):1–8.
Rodríguez G, Baños JE. Réplicas y perfección humana: Los niños del Brasil y GATTACA. Rev. Med. Cine. 2013;10(2):60–67.
Biscaia Fernández JM, Mohedano del Pozo RB. Descripción y análisis del contenido biomédico en las películas de la saga Alien. Rev. Med. Cine. 2020;16(1):29-36.
Guzmán Toro F. El determinismo genético y las limitaciones de los nuevos paradigmas de la ciencia contemporánea. Argumentos de Razón Técnica. 2016;(19):151–161.
Cortés FV. Eugenesia y Determinismo Genético. Una Solución Simple a un Problema Complejo. Acta Bioeth. 2017;23(2):279–288.
Niccol A. Gattaca. 1997.
Cortés Gabaudan F. genética DICCIOMED: Diccionario médico-biológico, histórico y etimológico. 2004.
Villela Cortés Fabiola, Linares Salgado Jorge E. Eugenics: A historical analysis and a possible proposal. Acta Bioeth. 2011; 17( 2 ): 189-197..
Febrero B, Almela-Baeza J, Ros I, Pérez MB, Pérez A, Cascales P, et al. The Impact of information and communications technology and broadcasting on YouTube for improving attitude toward organ donation in Secondary Education with the creation of short films. Patient. Educ. Couns. 2021;104(9):2317-2326.
Sterckx S, Cockbain J, Howard HC, Borry P. «I prefer a child with…»: designer babies, another controversial patent in the arena of direct-to-consumer genomics. Genet. Med. 2013;15(12):923–944.
Kirby DA. The New Eugenics in Cinema: Genetic Determinism and Gene Therapy in GATTACA. Science Fiction Studies. 2000;27(2).
Cribbs AP, Perera SMW. Science and bioethics of CRISPR-CAS9 gene editing: An analysis towards separating facts and fiction. Yale J. Biol. Med. 2017;90(4):625-634.
Greene M, Master Z. Ethical Issues of Using CRISPR Technologies for Research on Military Enhancement. J Bioeth Inq. 2018;15(3):327–35.
Ingersoll EG, Asimov I, Gerald GF, Wolf J, Duberman J, Philmus R. A Conversation with Isaac Asimov. Science Fiction Studies. 1987 ;14(1):68–77.
Kirby D. Cinematic Science: The Public Communication of Science and Technology in Popular Film. In: Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology. 2008. p. 67–94.
Ternisien X. Nuevas fronteras de la ciencia-ficción. Revista Mensaje. 1996;45(447):45–48.
Menadue CB, Giselsson K, Guez D. An Empirical Revision of the Definition of Science Fiction: It Is All in the Techne. Sage Open. 2020;10(4).
Westfahl G. The mechanics of wonder: The creation of the idea of science fiction. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press; 1998.
Vidal F. Introduction: From «The Popularization of Science through Film» to «The Public Understanding of Science.» Sci. Context. 2018;31(1):1–14.
Science on film. Nature Phys. 5, 703 (2009).
Chapela A. Between fiction and science: The use of narrative in teaching science. Educ. Quim. [Internet]. 2014;25(1):2–6.
Rose CS. Biology in the Movies: Using the Double-Edged Sword of Popular Culture to Enhance Public Understanding of Science. Evol. Biol. 2007;34(1):49–54.
Cambra-Badii I, Guardiola E, Baños JE. Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus: a classic novel to stimulate the analysis of complex contemporary issues in biomedical sciences. BMC Med. Ethics. 2021;22(1):1–8.
Rodríguez G, Baños JE. Réplicas y perfección humana: Los niños del Brasil y GATTACA. Rev. Med. Cine. 2013;10(2):60–67.
Biscaia Fernández JM, Mohedano del Pozo RB. Descripción y análisis del contenido biomédico en las películas de la saga Alien. Rev. Med. Cine. 2020;16(1):29-36.
Guzmán Toro F. El determinismo genético y las limitaciones de los nuevos paradigmas de la ciencia contemporánea. Argumentos de Razón Técnica. 2016;(19):151–161.
Cortés FV. Eugenesia y Determinismo Genético. Una Solución Simple a un Problema Complejo. Acta Bioeth. 2017;23(2):279–288.
Niccol A. Gattaca. 1997.
Cortés Gabaudan F. genética DICCIOMED: Diccionario médico-biológico, histórico y etimológico. 2004.
Villela Cortés Fabiola, Linares Salgado Jorge E. Eugenics: A historical analysis and a possible proposal. Acta Bioeth. 2011; 17( 2 ): 189-197..
Febrero B, Almela-Baeza J, Ros I, Pérez MB, Pérez A, Cascales P, et al. The Impact of information and communications technology and broadcasting on YouTube for improving attitude toward organ donation in Secondary Education with the creation of short films. Patient. Educ. Couns. 2021;104(9):2317-2326.
Almela Baeza, J., & Graterol-Guía, M. (2023). Cinema in Learning about Genetic Manipulation through Science Fiction in Gattaca (1997). Journal of Medicine and Movies, 19(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.14201/rmc.30822
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
+
−