Blade Runner: Exploring Themes of Genetic Engineering, Replication, and Technocracy

Abstract

This paper discusses the concepts in Blade Runner and its perspectives on genetic engineering, replication, and technocracy. Following a brief compendium of the movie, concepts will be explored in relation to the emerging Knowledge Society through authors and works read in IDS 803 and other writers who delve into what is occurring now and/or what may occur in the future as regards genetic engineering, replication, and technocracy. Intimations concerning a future rich in the concepts of Blade Runner are developed to close the piece.

Blade Runner: Exploring Themes of Genetic Engineering, Replication, and Technocracy

Every day we see stories about our world’s ever-increasing connection with technology. Technology is pervasive and consistent—it pushes its way into our lives in some manner, regardless if we think it necessary or not. Our cars have computer chips and sensors that inform us when tire pressure is low, the engine needs serviced, fuel is running low, and so on. It’s nearly impossible to make it through a day without using a smartphone, a computer, or satellite television. Amazon Alexa and Google Home give us access to our homes in new ways, from controlling lighting to locking and unlocking doors. Smart machines—artificial intelligences—are already in front of us. Furthermore, the world of genetic engineering and replication (related term: cloning) have become a regular part of our world. In vitro fertilization is used by many people struggling to have a child. We eat genetically modified beef, bananas, and barley. While full replication via cloning has not been knowingly used or successful with humans, thousands and thousands of plants, seeds, and animals have been cloned; replications of specific human genes or segments of human genes has also proven successful. It is widely known that human cells replicate themselves naturally, from the moment sperm and egg meet and all throughout life. Additionally, while no government has become a full technocracy as of today, bits and pieces of the technocratic mindset are making their way into governments worldwide.

In Blade Runner, we see the ways in which genetic engineering, replication, and technocracy can impact the world. The movie, released in 1982, depicts a futuristic 2019 in which the Tyrell Corporation is in control of Los Angeles. All things technological reign supreme, from video pay phone systems to hovercraft style vehicles to massive commercial advertisements playing on vehicles and building exteriors (see Figure 1). The city is peak technology from top to bottom, inside and outside.

Figure 1: Blade Runner, screenshot

The Tyrell Corporation has developed a group of genetically engineered beings called Replicants. Only the best traits, chosen depending on the model and position they will take, are chosen to create the Nexus 6, the newest version. They are designed only to serve the world—they are utilized as a type of slave labor in the dangerous off-world colonies. They are given a lifespan of but four years, as this has been decided the period before which they begin to obtain human emotions and sentiments. Bounty hunters, called Blade Runners in the film, are tasked with finding Replicants who have left their stations or are believed to be at risk of causing issues. These Blade Runners, specifically main character Rick Deckard, are to kill these Replicants, a system they call retiring.

However, Replicants are nearly indistinguishable from humans, aside from the superior traits chosen to make them most useful. This causes some issues in the film as the sentience of Replicants begins to be explored. Deckard’s encounters with Replicants Roy Batty and Rachael (with whom he falls in love) cause him to rethink his view on the beings. Rachael turns out to be a new Tyrell design, created to further blur the lines between human and machine. She has been constructed with memories from a human—Tyrell’s own niece. This makes it harder for Blade Runners, including Deckard, to distinguish her as human or machine. Batty follows a Frankenstein’s monster scenario in which he confronts his creator with the question of why they are only given four-year lifespans and if that can be changed to give them a more human lifespan. After finding that Eldon Tyrell has not found a good way to prolong Nexus 6 Replicant life, Batty destroys his creator.

Genetic Engineering

“Accursed creator! Why did you form a monster so hideous that even you turned from me in disgust? God, in pity, made man beautiful and alluring, after his own image...Satan had his companions, fellow-devils, to admire and encourage him; but I am solitary and abhorred.” (Shelley, 1818, p. 112).

The first theme to be discussed is genetic engineering now and in the future. At current, the use of genetic engineering has largely been to create plants and seeds that are sturdy and reliable, help couples with fertilization, and in some cases assure that a serious genetic disorder or disease is not passed down from parents to children. As the process of genetic engineering becomes safer and more refined, we are seeing alternatives to these basic uses. For instance, the idea of designer children is becoming increasing popular. As mentioned earlier, IVF processes fall into the category of designer babies. Genetic engineering, in its beginnings, was extremely controversial. Some believed that the manipulation of genes for any purpose was playing God—the process became a moral issue. Today, while some still believe it is immoral, the general mindset has adapted to accept some forms of genetic engineering, such as genetically modified foods (meats, vegetables, fruits, etc.) and IVF procedures which allow those with infertility to have children. Medical professionals in IVF specialties insist “Transplantation services basically relates to embryo testing. So, it’s almost like an early form of prenatal diagnosis for the embryos tested before it even implants and forms a pregnancy” (“Genetic engineering,” 2011, 04:38). That is to say, genetic engineering via IVF practices, despite common thought, is not creating designer babies. Rather it is a diagnostic tool to keep humans from suffering painful or deadly diseases and problems.

In Blade Runner we see the implications of using very specific traits to create a type of superhuman being. For Replicant Roy Batty, his design includes supreme intelligence and strength. These characteristics are both an advantage and a hindrance. He was, after all, designed to be human but better than human. Batty is the ultimate Nietzschean Superman. Indeed, Eldon Tyrell’s motto could easily have been Nietzsche’s (1883) statement, “Man is something that is to be surpassed. What have ye done to surpass man?” (Prologue, part 3). Tyrell, of course, created the ultimate beings (Replicants) to surpass man.

The idea of a more human than human being is not new, and the strives to reach this so-called Übermensch continue in several ways. Charles Darwin studied survival of the fittest; through evolution, humankind became better so to persevere through an ever-changing world. Today, evolution is not the only way we can bridge the gap between basic humans and the Superman. Genetic engineering allows people to rise above the expectations of humanity. In fact, gene therapy (a form of genetic engineering) has been used to create super athleticism. In 1998, a scandal involving the use of EPO was discovered at the Tour de France (Naam, 2005). EPO is a normal hormone of the human body which creates red blood cells (Naam, 2005). Injections of EPO cause a person to create more red blood cells, and in a person with normal red blood cell counts, it leads to a significant increase in oxygen-carrying potentiality, further leading to expanded endurance (Naam, 2005). Of course, this is an example of genetic engineering post-birth or post-creation, but the point is that scientists know which genes to manipulate and how to use these same techniques to design the optimum human. Indeed, in Blade Runner, Replicants are engineered not through sperm and egg cells before creation but rather later to create teenage or adult beings with the wanted characteristics and an age the creators deem appropriate for service. Creation of the Replicants in Blade Runner relies heavily on using the best manipulated genes.

Replication

“We are survival machines—robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes.” (Gleick, 2011, p. 301)

Genetic replication is both a naturally occurring system in humans and a rapidly increasing technological way of manipulating genes. As Gleick (2011) observes, “Genes, not organisms, are the true units of natural selection. They began as ‘replicators’—molecules formed accidentally in the primordial soup, with the unusual property of making copies of themselves” (p. 301-302). The essence of Gleick’s statement is that replication already naturally occurs in humans and always has. Additionally, according to the RAND National Defense Research Institute authors Antón et al. (2001),

Artificially producing genetically identical organisms through cloning will likely be significant for engineered crops, livestock, and research animals. Cloning may become the dominant mechanism for rapidly bringing engineered traits to market, for continued maintenance of these traits, and for producing identical organisms for research and production. Research will likely continue on human cloning in unregulated parts of the world with possible success by 2015, but ethical and health concerns will likely limit wide-scale cloning of humans in regulated parts of the world (p. 6).

The RAND Report was correct. The world now has access to crops and livestock that have been created through gene replication, and these engineered seeds and animals are highly prized commodities in the world market.

Human replication, however, remains controversial and only small experiments are being utilized to see what can be done with humans through replication. As discussed in the section on genetic engineering, cloning (both part of genetic engineering and replication) is commonly used with plants and animals but not humans. In 2009, a group of geneticists developed a DNA replication method they call Repli Seq (Hansen, et al., 2009). The experiment used this technique to “to map temporally ordered replicating DNA using massively parallel sequencing” and then “applied it to study regional variation in human DNA replication time across multiple human cell types” (Hansen, et al., 2009, p. 139). The results of the examination were interesting for the world of genetics. The study showed that human cells are astonishingly pliable for replication programs (Hansen, et al., 2009). These geneticists found that replication timing and gene expression suggest that the data can “serve as a basis for further exploration of cell-type-specific replication programs, their evolutionary conservation, their variation in different genetic backgrounds, and their potential alteration in disease and disease susceptibility” (Hansen, et al., 2009, p. 143). That is to say, human replication in the near future is plausible. In Blade Runner, geneticist J.F. Sebastian has a disease in which he ages rapidly. Rather than the Tyrell Corporation using their high-tech knowledge to alter the genes causing such diseases, genetic engineering is used to produce slave labor via ideal specimens—Replicants (Cerqueira, 2015).

What is more, neuroscientist Professor Henry Markram of the Brain Mind Institute in Switzerland believes that the human brain will be replicable within around 10 years (AlphaGalileo Foundation, 2009). The complexity of the human brain will not, according to Markram, stand in the way of rebuilding a model of it via replication (AlphaGalileo Foundation, 2009). He emphasizes today’s technology being immensely advanced, fostering the breakneck speed at which scientists can reverse engineer the human brain (AlphaGalileo Foundation, 2009). Markram states, “A brain model will sit on a massive supercomputer and serve as a kind of educational and diagnostic service to society. As the industrial revolution in science progresses, we will generate more data than anyone can track or any computer can store, so models that can absorb it are simply unavoidable” (AlphaGalileo Foundation, 2009, para. 1). In other words, Markram insists that the technology exists for it, so human brain replication is upon us.

Although Blade Runner does not specify from where the brain replication has come, we know that Eldon Tyrell has implanted memories in the Replicants. Conventional knowledge has it that memories are stored in the brain. Specifically, Rachael has been implanted with the memories of Tyrell’s niece. These memories residing in Rachael’s brain are real to her. She feels them as if she had lived them. In the movie, it seems that replication can directly relate to human emotions and human response.

Further, miscellaneous parts seem to be the basis for Replicant creation. When Roy Batty meets J.F. Sebastian, Batty says he is a Nexus 6 Replicant, and Sebastian states that a bit of himself is in Batty. Also, when Batty confronts geneticist Chew, Chew recognizes his own work in Batty’s eyes—Chew had genetically engineered the eyes. Chew then goes on to tell Batty that Eldon Tyrell had designed Batty’s brain, his mind. In terms of each part of a Replicant, the motto seems to be to keep the best and lose the rest.

The movie draws a distinct line between humans and Replicants, but the memories and emotions experienced by the Replicants blur the line for the audience. Batty expresses his emotions as would a human. He falls in love with Pris Stratton, a fellow Replicant, and as their short lifespan is closing in, he wishes to save her from her imminent death. He is an emotional being, partially due to his incredible intelligence. Batty passionately states to genetic engineer J.F. Sebastian, “If we don't find help soon, Pris hasn't got long to live. We can't allow that” (Scott, 2007, 1:18:32). He is desperate to save his love.

Beyond this, the movie shows other Replicants conveying sadness, upset, anger, worry, and other human emotions. When Deckard shoots Zhora, one of the escaped Replicants who wants only to live as humanlike as possible, we see tears streaming from her eyes. In response to Zhora’s death, Leon Kowalski, another of the escaped Replicants, shows fear for the surviving Replicants’ lives and sadness for the loss of his friend. Also, we see Kowalski’s anger as he attacks Deckard for killing Zhora. Kowalski hits Deckard, then grabs Deckard and looks him directly in the eyes, saying, “Painful to live in fear, isn’t it?” (Scott, 2007, 1:02:27). Essentially, Kowalski wants Deckard to see they are living beings with thoughts and feelings. Additionally, when discussing the memories Tyrell has implanted in her, Rachael cries when discussing her mother. Also, as mentioned in the introductory section, Roy Batty shows intense anger with his creator for giving them such short lifespans.

According to factoids about the movie through Amazon Prime video, the Voight-Kampff test used by Deckard in the movie is based on Alan Turing’s Imitation Game (now more commonly called the Turing Test) (Scott, 2007, 0:05:38). In this test, “a judge would engage in a digital conversation with the participant…asking questions to discern whether the respondent was human or a machine” (Boissoneault, 2017, para. 21). The issue with the Turing Test in modern times is that computer programs have been written which would easily pass, though they are not human. On the other hand, Susan Schneider, professor of philosophy at the University of Connecticut, worked with astrophysicist Edwin Turner to create the AI Consciousness Test (Boissoneault, 2017). Like the Turing Test, it asks a series of questions, “but instead of demanding the presence of empathy—feelings directed towards another—it looks at feelings about being a self” (Boissoneault, 2017, para. 20). Moreover, “Work like this is urgent, she says, because humanity is not ethically prepared to deal with the repercussions of creating sentient life. What will make judging our creations even harder is the human reliance on anthropomorphism to indicate what should count as a being worthy of moral consideration” (Boissoneault, 2017, para. 22). Schneider believes it is imperative for the future to know if a being is aware of itself and responsive, because the lines between human and artificial life will be so diminished. The following exchange in Blade Runner further promotes the obfuscation of the line between Replicants and humans:

J.F. Sebastian: Show me something.

Roy Batty: Like what?

J.F. Sebastian: Like anything.

Roy Batty: We’re no computers, Sebastian. We’re physical.

Pris Stratton: I think, Sebastian, therefore I am. (Scott, 2007, 1:17:29).

Issues in Genetic Engineering and Replication/Cloning

Genetic engineering causes some ethical dilemmas and arguments about its use. In genetically modified animals, their offspring may suffer unintended consequences (Mehlman, 2012). These animals may have seemed healthy in their lives, but their progeny have suffered such effects as being too large for normal births, cancers, muscle disorders, and other serious health issues (Mehlman, 2012). Moreover, in 2000 a human experiment in genetic engineering in France showed unexpected issues. Geneticists inserted repaired genes into babies that had been born with a genetic disorder that kept their immune systems from maturing (Mehlman, 2012). Using a retrovirus to introduce the modified genes into the babies, the gene therapy appeared to work and was deemed a success (Mehlman, 2012). However, soon after, several of the infants were diagnosed with leukemia, which had been triggered by the retrovirus implanting too near the normal cancer-causing genes all humans have (Mehlman, 2012). On the other hand, some genetic manipulation that has proven successful is also seen by many as problematic. For example, some gene therapies that have improved the health of individuals with severe health problems such as spinal muscular atrophy or cystic fibrosis create only somatic cell changes (Mehlman, 2012). While these improve the health of the person on whom the genetic engineering has been done, the possibility of passing on the genes for these diseases remains and their offspring may then have the diseases (Mehlman, 2012).

There are also some worries about society if genetic engineering were to overtake human genetics. For instance, a further divide in class and wealth may occur, especially in the first decades of the new technology (Mehlman, 2012). As with all new technologies, prices at the start are far higher than most of the world can afford. While the price would drop as demand for the procedures increased, until that time, those who could afford the services may cultivate a deeper segregation between themselves and the poorer classes (Mehlman, 2012). Some people, such as Professor of Biomedical Ethics at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Maxwell J. Mehlman (2012), worry that germ line engineering for new and improved genetics could cause a new elite class he calls the genobility. Mehlman (2012) further worries that “genobility would refuse to interact socially with those whom they felt were their inferiors and, in particular, would decline to reproduce with them” (p. 101). Just as likely, Mehlman (2012) argues, those who are genetically engineered may be treated as outcasts, furthering class divisions. This is precisely the situation in Blade Runner, where Replicants are viewed as a Marxian proletariat class, while humans remain the bourgeoisie.

Another fear many have about genetic engineering is that eugenics will once again play a part in society. According to philosophers Baillie et al. (2004), “What critics primarily fear is “backdoor” eugenics— the collective impact of practices voluntarily chosen by consumers (especially in the context of a largely unregulated fertility industry)” (p. 124). In other words, those who seek to genetically engineer their offspring will, over time, create humans who have only those traits which are considered desirable, while those who are disabled or of a certain class, race, ethnicity, etc. may be considered undesirable and may, in fact, cease to exist at all. This goal of human betterment, it is posited, may cause the reappearance of historical eugenics, such as those used to purify the Aryan race in Nazi Germany or the U.S. involuntary sterilization of those seen as unfit or defective (Baillie, et al., 2004).

In fact, Blade Runner focuses on those who are genetically engineered being outsiders, as well as being created from only the most desirable traits. Not only are Replicants made to work and live in off-world colonies, citizens on-world are discouraged from creating bonds with the Replicants. The Replicants are servants, workers, artificial beings—nothing more. Mehlman’s idea of a genobility is visible in the movie. Moreover, The Nexus 6 Replicants are designed in a way makes them incapable of reproduction, a seeming attempt at keeping Replicants in their place and from creating a master race of beings—no germ line engineering is thus allowed.

Baillie et al. (2004) discuss the start of these issues succinctly, saying, “While it is true that the cloning of nonhuman animals and the engineering of agricultural products have gone forward without much serious public reflection or debate (at least in the United States) about their desirability or chances of success, the very real possibility of applying these techniques to humans in the not-too-distant future seems finally to have caused many in the political community and some in the scientific professions to step back and ask whether we really want to go down this road” (p. 2). Many issues stem from religious and moral question and implications, just as discussed in the genetic engineering section of this paper. Indeed, American ethicist Jean Bethke Elshtain claims cloning technology is “indicative of our desire for control and sameness, and hence of our fear of the Other. As a significant part of the eugenics project to exert full authority over human reproductive material, cloning represents an anthropocentrism antithetical to natural diversity” (Baillie, et al., 2004, p. 15). The worries of losing variations in humans and maintaining bodily autonomy in a time of rigorous cloning remains important.

Ownership over genetically engineered organisms is also disputable. Do the rights to genes belong to the person from which the genes were taken, do they belong to the being who has been created using the genes, or does some organization own the rights, such as the company that extracts, implants, and/or creates using the genes? As Jeremy Rifkin (2000) reminds us, “When genes with potential commercial values are located, they are patented and become, in the eyes of the law, inventions” (p. 65). This is especially common in agriculture, where Monsanto and other major agricultural companies frequently acquire rights to genetically modified seeds (Rifkin, 2000). Moreover, genetically modified animals are now seeing similar fates. Farmers and scientists who have purchased animals have been allowed to hold rights over the brood born of these animals, but with new cloning capabilities and genetic engineering, these animals become the property of the patent holders (Rifkin, 2000).

What does this say for human-related genetic engineering? Analysis points to the same ownership system. Rifkin (2000) asserts that human cells and genes are already being patented and believes that “in less than twenty-five years, much of the genetic commons…will have been isolated, identified, and enclosed in the form of intellectual property, controlled, for the most part, by a handful of giant transnational life-science companies” (p. 66). An example of this issue is the Havasupai people of the Grand Canyon region. This largely isolated group of peoples with a high prevalence of type 2 diabetes, agreed to allow researchers to take blood samples for diabetes-related research (Andrews, n.d.). Researchers also used the samples to research other issues, such as schizophrenia and inbreeding, which the Havasupai people did not agree to (Andrews, n.d.). This upset the Havasupai, who said the research stigmatized them and “insist they would not have authorized the…research because it conflicts with their religious beliefs about their origins” (Andrews, n.d., para. 7). The courts sided with researchers and claimed that the Havasupai did not hold claim to their DNA, rather the researchers did (Andrews, n.d.). Although permission was given to use the genes for diabetes research, express permission was not given to use the genes beyond that. In Blade Runner, it seems that the genes and the genetic beings are owned strictly by the Tyrell Corporation. This, despite their yearning to live, is why the Replicants are told they are created as they are supposed to be, useful to humans and dead before they can become too real.

Perhaps the biggest dilemma in genetic engineering and replication is: At which point does a genetically engineered being become defined as a human, and at what point is it defined as a machine? Baillie et al. (2004) argue that “it is clear that a cloned human being hardly ceases to be human simply because it is cloned” (p. 200). The standard way of thinking about humanity has it that emotions and memories are a large part of what makes humans, well, human. So, should beings that are designed with these traits, these characteristics so known to humanity be seen as human? After all, in Blade Runner,

The Nexus 6 are beings that embody the ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity: the very principles that the corporations dominating the world are trampling. United by a value they consider supreme – the right to life – the replicants show feelings of love and compassion for their fellow beings and are able to give their life to save others. In stark comparison, the humans seem incapable of feeling and acting with compassion. In a dehumanised world it is therefore the replicants who are keener to live, love, and be free (Cerquiera, 2015, para. 8).

But will these beings be viewed as human?

Other works discussing these topics suggest it will not be so simple. For instance, in Brian Aldiss’s Super-Toys Last All Summer Long, a future in which human reproduction is highly regulated means that many people have artificially intelligent children. Mrs. Swinton is a parent of an AI child, David. David works very hard to make his mother love him; he draws for her, picks flowers for her, and generally attempts to show his love for her in every way he knows how (Aldiss, 1997). Despite this, Mrs. Swinton cannot make herself love David. Eventually, she and her husband are chosen in the reproduction lottery, allowing them to have a child of their own (Aldiss, 1997). As the story closes, we are left with the Swintons unsure of what they’ll do with David when the new baby is born (Aldiss, 1997). Mrs. Swinton cannot look past David’s design as AI, despite his behaviors mocking that of a human child. Was he not human, though? Were his memories and feelings not as real as those that will help to form the new baby’s life? Near the end of Blade Runner, Roy Batty gives an emotional speech in which his feelings and memories are highlighted (see Figure 2). His memories, which include what he has seen in his off-world work, show that he has created these memories himself; they were not implanted into his brain via genetic engineering.

(Figure 2: Roy Batty, Tears in rain monologue)

Technocracy

“Commerce is our goal here at Tyrell. "More human than human" is our motto.” – Dr. Eldon Tyrell, Blade Runner (Scott, 1982, 0:21:58).

What is technocracy? Merriam-Webster’s (n.d.) online dictionary defines it as a “government by technicians; specifically: management of society by technical experts” (para. 1). In 2011, Italy gave power to Mario Monti and his technocratic government in hopes of fixing the debt with which the country was struggling (Hooper, para. 1). Greece did much the same shortly after Italy, for the same reasons (Hooper, para. 12). Similarly, China has a recent history of putting those with engineering and science degrees in political positions, with little to show in terms of improvement (Palmer, para. 1). The world is seeing technocracy grow in leaps and bounds. As journalist Michael Newton (2015) posits, “one of the good guesses Blade Runner made about the future is that it would not be governments, but corporations who would really run things. Indebtedness to commercial power depersonalises the people in this film: more even than dispensable workers, the replicants are not makers of the product, they are the product” (para. 7).

Technocracy has been part of the world for longer than most realize. European imperialism created technocracies in dependent colonies in Africa and Asia to supply the home countries with workers, production, and materials for their own market increases (Olson, 2015). The U.S. had a small version of technocracy in its southern states with plantations and slavery, further expanding with Frederick W. Taylor’s Scientific Management in the Industrial Revolution (Olson, 2015). As American historian Daniel Boorstin argues, the United States is a “republic of technology” refined by a “technology of politics” (qtd. in Gunnell, 1982, p. 410). The republic of technology then spread globally, largely thanks to Taylor’s Scientific Management.

It is widely known that corporations in the U.S. are part of PACs and SuperPACs, lobbying for government laws, rules, and regulations that benefit their organizations, especially through technologic and scientific means. Similar circumstances are occurring in other countries as well. Because of this interwoven technological and political world, “the executive branches of governments usually have greater access to advisory expertise; so they have, in effect, a very large role in promoting as well as in enforcing legislative policies” (Olson, 2015, p. 154). Olson’s point is that technicians are increasingly responsible for bills and statutes that govern leadership and citizens.

Blade Runner’s Tyrell Corporation is clearly in charge of rules and laws that govern Los Angeles. When the Replicant group kills the members of the ship they are on and takes over the ship, the Tyrell Corporation brands them fugitives. With fugitive classification, the Replicants become the target of Blade Runners. Blade Runners are to retire these genetically engineered beings, without question. As soon as the Replicants are discovered on-world, Blade Runner Deckard goes after them with the express permission of the police and the Tyrell Corporation.

Issues in Technocracy

While some aspects of technocracy appear from the outside to work, a deeper dive into the system shows glaring problems. John G. Gunnell (1982) observes three recognizable theories regarding the impact of technology on politics:

1. “In circumstances in which political decisions necessarily involve specialized knowledge and the exercise of technical skills, political power tends to gravitate toward technological elites

2. Technology has become autonomous, hence politics has become a function of systemic structural determinants over which it has little or no control

3. Technology (and science) constitute a new legitimating ideology that subtly masks certain forms of social domination” (p. 397).

In connection with Gunnell’s observations, Professor of history Richard G. Olson (2015) reports, “In spite of the fact that technocratic decisions have largely been well intentioned and aimed at improving the general welfare of citizens of the developing world, perhaps their greatest impact has been to exacerbate existing inequalities both within developing nations and— except for the Asian Dragons and Brazil— between the advanced industrial world and developing nations” (p. 180-181). Basically, Olson is warning that the intentions of many technocrats, while not deliberately detrimental, have the major consequence of reinforcing and increasing the so-called North-South divide. The same can be said of the deepening between the rich and poor within a country, such as the U.S. technocracy tending to favor the wealthy who can afford to lobby for their needs.

Additionally, advice given by technicians in control of major governmental organizations and nongovernmental organizations may not be heeded or may be warped if they differ from the views of the current political leaders (Olson, 2015). The Bush administration saw complications in political technocracy in these ways in 2004 when “scientists from the Union of Concerned Scientists and a large number of members of the National Academy of Sciences charged that the administration, ‘manipulated scientific advisory committees, altered and suppressed reports by government scientists, and misrepresented scientific knowledge in contentious areas such as global warming, air pollution, and reproductive health’” (Olson, 2015, p. 154). Similar issues are arising across the European Union as well. Gunnell (1982) further argues, “The state…is simply an instrument of technicians; the power ‘displacement toward the executive branch is only a stage in the progressive elimination of political action itself’” (p. 404). In making this argument, Gunnell is contending that in a technocratic world, moving power away from the executive branch of government is a phase through which political operations will cease in favor of technicians exerting political power.

Additionally, Simon Head (2003) insists is that in the techno-economic system, workers are denigrated. In this statement, Head is emphasizing the unfair treatment of workers in technocracy. Blade Runner displays unfair treatment of workers in technocracy by keeping the Tyrell Corporation in power; this power is fostered by using Replicants as labor in dangerous and degrading work, such as the off-world back-breaking labor performed by Roy Batty and the so-called pleasure model duties (i.e. sexual and romantic obligations) performed by Pris Stratton. In addition, the shaping of prodigious intelligence in Replicants by Eldon Tyrell highly benefits his company. According to Naam (2005), “Any technique that increases the human ability to learn, to think, or to communicate is going to produce economic returns” (p. 50). The Tyrell Corporation fabricates such extensive intelligence in some of its Replicants, such as Batty and Stratton, that the labor provided by them means more money and power for the corporation and less for the humans and Replicants.

Combined Effects of Genetic Engineering, Replication, and Technology

As a sort of secondary effect of the three major themes discussed in previous sections, Blade Runner points to a transhumanist future. According to Max More, “Transhumanism is a class of philosophies of life that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its currently human form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values” (qtd. in “What is transhumanism,” n.d., para. 3). In making this comment, More argues that humans are not yet in their best or final form, and appropriate use of technology can and will help humans reach that goal. As it happens, many other scientists, authors, philosophers, etc. concur with this concept.

As previously discussed, German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche authored the book Also sprach Zarathustra: Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen (Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for Everyone and No one), in which a man issues warning to the people that the time of the Übermensch (beyond-man, superman, or superhuman) is approaching. Similarly, technologist Ramez Naam discusses in More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement the ways in which humans are currently becoming better versions of ourselves with the help of science and technology, creating bionic body parts, using cybernetics, and altering our genetic makeup. Further, distinguished professor Maxwell J. Mehlman examines the rise of transhumanist values in the modern day in his book Transhumanist Dreams and Dystopian Nightmares: The Promise and Peril of Genetic Engineering.

Transhumanism is undeniably the aim of many scientists, technologists, technocrats, citizens, etc. The idea of transhumanism is not, however, a new one. Author John Loeffler (2018) reminds us, “The idea of altering or augmenting the human body through technology is as old as humanity itself. From the moment humans first fashioned tools and learned to harness fire, humanity stepped beyond its biological constraints” (para. 3). At present, transhumanist organizations exist that hope to better explain their philosophies and gain further support for their cause(s). Humanity+ is a nonprofit organization that “advocates the ethical use of technology, such as artificial intelligence, to expand human capacities… In other words, we want people to be better than well” (Humanity+, n.d., para. 1). Humanity+ urges transhumanism as part of the betterment of society. Moreover, in relation to the extensive flexibility as mentioned in the section on Repli Seq experimentation, “Transhumanism is possible because of something known as neuroplasticity, the capacity for the neurons in our brain to make new connections and reconfigure its network in response to new stimuli, information, trauma, or dysfunction” (Loeffler, 2018, para. 7).

Blade Runner brilliantly exhibits transhumanist prospects through genetic engineering, replication, and technocracy. The Tyrell Corporation keeps improving upon its Nexus versions to create the ultimate being, the “more human than human” it wants for its own benefit (Scott, 1982, 0:21:58). Nexus 6 replicants are nearly perfect to Eldon Tyrell, even with their limited lifespans, as can be seen in this exchange between himself and Roy Batty.

Eldon Tyrell: You were made as well as we could make you.

Roy Batty: But not to last.

Eldon Tyrell: The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. And you have burned so very, very brightly, Roy. Look at you. You’re the prodigal son. You’re quite a prize.

Roy Batty: I’ve done… questionable things.

Eldon Tyrell: Also extraordinary things. Revel in your time! (Scott, 2007, 1:24:57).

With Rachael, a Nexus 7 Replicant, Tyrell attempted to make an even more human entity by embedding specific and realistic memories with genetic engineering. It is later revealed in Blade Runner 2049 (released in 2017) that Rachael was also created with the possibility to reproduce, which she does by having a daughter with Deckard (Orquiola, 2017). Tyrell aims to create the Nietzschean superhuman, regardless of the consequences for the superbeings, which goes against transhumanist organizations’ ethics. Nonetheless, transhumanist efforts through a hierarchical technocracy are exhibited in Blade Runner.

Reaction to Research

“The advance of genetic engineering makes it quite conceivable that we will begin to design our own evolutionary progress.”—Isaac Asimov (qtd. in “Safeguarding the future,” 2017, para. 1).

We already live in a time of abundant technological progression and relatively understated technocracy. Over time, technocracy will continue to grow and spread globally. Technicians and politicians will need to learn to work together to provide the best possible governments for their citizens. Examinations of considerations for what is best need be applied to people, ecosystems, the environment, and the global marketplace, not just organizations who may have the most buying power into government decision-making. Avoidance of a world such as the Los Angeles we see in Blade Runner is fundamental. There should be minimization of suffering, wealth gaps, climate issues, and anti-globalization through reforms, laws, and regulations. All in all, politics and technocracy will have to walk hand in hand to optimally provide for all Earth’s inhabitants.

Science and technology will also continue to rapidly progress and will only increase the opportunities for humans to become extraordinary beings, like the Nietzschean Übermensch. While the year 2020 has not yet seen the lofty ambitions of Blade Runner technology, it is only a matter of time. As attorney Joshua Rosenkranz suggests, “Since humans are the sole species on earth that can plan and create, perhaps there is something uniquely human about procreation through genetic engineering.” (qtd. in Mehlman, 2012, p. 87). Rosenkranz’s point is that humans already have high abilities that other animals have not yet evolved, so it is conceivable that we are meant to work toward a superhuman version of ourselves.

There will be much debate surrounding the idea of superhumans being human or machine. It is likely that artificial intelligence, even if created using genetic engineering and replication of human genes, will cause many to see these beings as just what the term states—artificial. Conventional wisdom has it that humans, as the species stands now, sometimes struggle to see other humans as undisputedly human. For instance, there is a long world history of slavery. Slaves were at times members of the community for which they labored; however, more often they were outsiders who were from other states, religions, ethnicities, races, etc. The history of American slavery shows that people often can view others as subhuman instead of human. On the other hand, with memories and thoughts, whether implanted or created through their own experiences, many others will have a difficult time seeing these beings as simply machines. This also has historical implications, as abolitionists fought a long and hard battle for slaves to be freed, to be allowed to be human.

This blurred line between human and machine (or superhuman) shows throughout Blade Runner. The Replicants in the movie are parallel to humans in enough ways that viewing them as sentient should not be difficult—they have emotions, they have memories, and they are physical entities. This is precisely why, says Professor Susan Schneider, there is a “very strong case for treating [a non-human] with the same legal rights we give a human. We wouldn’t call [Rachael] a human, but maybe a person” (qtd. in Boissoneault, 2017, para. 17). Schneider’s point is all people should be treated equally, not just based on being perceived as human or not. To take it a step further, Eric Schwitzgebel, professor of philosophy at University of California at Riverside, asseverates, “If we someday create robots with human-like cognitive and emotional capacities, we owe them more moral consideration than we would normally owe to otherwise similar human beings…We will have been their creators and designers. We are thus directly responsible both for their existence and for their happy or unhappy state” (qtd. in Boissoneault, 2017, para. 18). In making this comment, Schwitzgebel urges us to remember that, much like a parent, we are the creators of these beings and we owe it to them to make sure they are respected and contented. After all, “it is clear that a cloned human being hardly ceases to be human simply because it is cloned” (Baillie, et al., 2014, p. 200). The idea of artificial intelligence being allowed personhood is not a new one, and it will likely continue as a topic of debate as the possibilities for creating them increases. In fact, the idea of creators respecting their creations is a firm topic in the video game Detroit: Become Human, in which emotionally responsive AI stands up against their use as labor in hopes of being allowed to live freely as people (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Detroit: Become Human

Any worries that humanity in its current state will cease to survive as these superhumans come into existence appears to be misplaced. At present, no technocracy exists that is forcing citizens to become Übermenschen, nor are governments forcing genetic engineering to create these superhumans. The endeavor toward more human than human remains a choice. As Ramez Naam (2005) argues, “We will not all opt for the same changes. We will not all choose the same direction of travel. Different men and women, different communities, different ideologies, will all select different goals to work towards. Some of us will choose to stay as we are, while others will choose to transform. Humanity will expand, splinter, and blossom” (p. 198). As Naam pronounces, humanity as it stands will change, but it will not cease to be. The time is upon us—let’s build a better world for all people!

References

Aldiss, B. (1997, January 1). Super-toys last all summer long. Wired. https://www.wired.com/1997/01/ffsupertoys/

AlphaGalileo Foundation. (2009, September 4). Human brain could be replicated in 10 years, researcher predicts. ScienceDaily. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090904071908.htm

Andrews, L. (n.d.). Hands off my genes: Who’s looking at your DNA? [JPG image]. https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/5df3da6377577/61419?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%27genes.jpg&response-content-type=image%2Fjpeg&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20200215T202506Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=21600&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAZH6WM4PLTYPZRQMY%2F20200215%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=c41e03125fa7fbb7ebfd24a4209a56a3829e8d97e0f3230432c99ac683f17d0f.

Antón, P.S., Silberglitt, R., & Schneider, J. (2001). The global technology revolution: Bio/nano/materials trends and their synergies with information technology by 2015 [PDF file]. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1307.html

Baillie, H. W., Casey, T. K., & Caplan, A.L. (Eds.). (2004). Is human nature obsolete?: Genetics, bioengineering, and the future of the human condition. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.fhsu.edu

Boissoneault, L. (2017, October 3). Are Blade Runner’s replicants “human”? Descartes and Locke have some thoughts. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/are-blade-runners-replicants-human-descartes-and-locke-have-some-thoughts-180965097/

Cerqueira, J. (2015, May 5). Slave runner: Genetic engineering, slavery, and immortality in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner (1982). Bright Lights Film Journal. https://brightlightsfilm.com/slave-runner-genetic-engineering-slavery-and-immortality-in-ridley-scotts-blade-runner-1982/

Genetic engineering: Medical ethics—real-world applications [Video file]. (2011). Retrieved March 11, 2020, from https://digital.films.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=96215&xtid=44664

Gleick, J. (2011). The information: A history, a theory, a flood. Vintage Books.

Gunnell, J. (1982). The technocratic image and the theory of technocracy. Technology and Culture, 23(3), 392-416. doi:10.2307/3104485

Hansen, R.S., Thomas, S., Sandstrom, R., Canfield, T.K., Thurman, R.E., Weaver, M., Dorschnew, M.O., Gartler, S.M., & Stamatoyannopoulos, J.A. (2010). Sequencing newly replicated DNA reveals widespread plasticity in human replication timing [PDF file]. Retrieved from https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/107/1/139.full.pdf

Head, S. (2003). The new ruthless economy: Work and power in the digital age. Oxford University Press.

Hooper, J. (2011, November 16). Mario Monti appoints technocrats to steer Italy out of economic crisis. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/mario-monti-technocratic-cabinet-italy

Humanity+. (n.d.). Humanity+ - What we do. https://humanityplus.org/

Loeffler, J. (2018, November 10). The transhuman revolution: What it is and how to prepare for its arrival. Interesting Engineering. https://interestingengineering.com/the-transhuman-revolution-what-is-it-and-how-we-can-prepare-for-its-arrival

Mehlman, M. J. (2012). Transhumanist dreams and dystopian nightmares: The promise and peril of genetic engineering. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.fhsu.edu

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Technocracy. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved March 11, 2020, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/technocracy

Naam, R. (Year of publication). More than human: Embracing the promise of biological enhancement. Broadway Books.

Newton, M. (2015, March 14). Tears in rain? Why Blade Runner is timeless. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/mar/14/why-blade-runner-is-timeless

Nietzsche, F. (1885). Thus spake Zarathustra [eBook edition #1998]. Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1998/1998-h/1998-h.htm

Olson, R. G. (2015). Scientism and technocracy in the twentieth century: The legacy of scientific management. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.fhsu.edu

Orquiola, J. (2017, October 6). Blade Runner 2049: What happened to Deckard and Rachael? Screenrant. https://screenrant.com/blade-runner-2049-rachael-deckard-daughter-backstory-explained/

Palmer, J. (2019, July 4). China’s overrated technocrats. Foreignpolicy.com. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/04/chinas-overrated-technocrats-stem-engineering-xi-jinping/

Rifkin, J. (2001). The age of access: The new culture of hypercapitalism, where all of life is a paid-for experience. Penguin Putnam.

Scott, R. (Director). (2007). Blade runner: The final cut [Film]. The Ladd Company.

Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus. Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor, & Jones.

Safeguarding the future of human gene editing. (2017, February 18). The Lancet. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30389-6/fulltext

What is transhumanism? (n.d.). The Lancet. Retrieved March 11, 2020 from https://whatistranshumanism.org/

*NOTE*

This was my term paper for one of my courses. Formatting has been altered slightly from standard APA to fit my writing blog.

Information:

LeeAnn J. Bontrager

Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Fort Hays State University

IDS 803: Origins and Implications of the Knowledge Society

Dr. Ted Schnetker

#films #movies #bladerunner #technology #writing #knowledgesociety #filmthemes