Posted on 2025/10/19

by Harry Ding

Edited by Fiona

Think of a dystopian science fiction film set in 1997. What do we expect? A pursuit of advanced outer space exploration? Well, yes—but far beyond that, a genetic coding invention is included. In this setting, the world has already evolved into an era where genes can be manipulated. Considering the sophisticated, though not duplicative, RNA and DNA with their chains of ribosomes, the world is undoubtedly an ultra-developed version of today. Eugenics makes the protagonist, Vincent, a loser at the start—he has many congenital defects that doom him to be inferior to the perfect product of eugenics: his brother.

Every step is more difficult for him than for others, but he chooses to work hard toward his dream of becoming an astronaut. His genes, like a résumé, have long been a stumbling block prevent

ing him from entering the field. Through someone’s introduction, he contacts a man named Jerome, who once won an Olympic silver medal in swimming but is now disabled. At first, Jerome only provides blood and urine samples for profit to help Vincent enter the space agency. When a murder occurs, the agency conducts multiple rounds of internal screening. Among them are many touching stories. Vincent meets a female federal investigator who decides to cover for him because she sees the brilliance of human nature beyond a string of genetic codes. During his final examination before the flight, the doctor’s son—who also has genetic defects—idolizes Vincent and helps him reach the rocket.

A particularly thought-provoking scene occurs when Vincent’s younger brother, a police officer, is moved by Vincent’s determination. As children, the two were upset when Vincent lost to his brother in a swimming race. Years later, they decide to have a rematch. Both try their best, but the genetically perfect brother still loses. When he asks Vincent why he didn’t turn back, Vincent replies, “I never thought about going back—why not keep moving forward?”

What is the current state of gene editing? Can gene editing evolve to a level similar to Vincent’s era?

This revolutionary biotechnology is used to modify the genome of living organisms. It is based on multiple tools that enable scientists to precisely edit and alter specific gene sequences. At present, people’s understanding is mostly limited to the genetic optimization of plants and livestock to maximize output and benefit, but the cost and miniaturization of so-called “molecular scissors” are barriers that limit further application to humans.

When considering whether gene editing could evolve into an era of widespread human adoption, people should focus more on ethical issues than on technical feasibility. Brain–computer technology, which similarly aims to “upgrade” humans, mirrors gene editing in its ethical complexity. Since feasibility has already been demonstrated, humanity’s accumulated wisdom is fully capable of advancing both technologies. Ethically, however, I draw on the dark reality shown in the Cantonese film The Bad Tongue Lawyer: in the face of law, the wealthy often do whatever it takes to escape punishment. When a technology emerges that can extend family power and widen the gap between people, can we truly expect it to be shared equally across society? I hold a negative attitude.

The brilliance of human nature cannot be defined by me as a mere traveler in the world; it is the finest embodiment of the idea that human nature is inherently good. Whether it was the unwavering support of the female federal investigator, the deep respect of Vincent’s brother, or Jerome’s selfless spirit, they were all crucial to Vincent’s success. They did not have to do any of this, but when faced with someone going against the current, perhaps both you and I would lend a hand. This is not just kindness—it is humanity itself, and, more importantly, the brilliance of human nature.