In a future society where customized humans are commonplace, Kataka tells the story of a natural human protagonist who fights against unequal treatment to fulfill his dream of becoming an astronaut, and examines social inequality based on genetic information and the possibility of introducing customized humans.
Kataka is a movie about ‘customized humans’. It tells the story of a non-customized human protagonist who finally becomes the astronaut of his dreams in a future society where the birth of customized humans has become commonplace and people are treated unequally based on their genetic information.
The movie makes us think deeply about the impact of the development of science and technology on human life and society. The concept of customized humans is not just a scientific imagination, but a possibility that genetic manipulation technology could become a reality. Even now, gene editing technology is rapidly advancing, and it could lead not only to treating diseases, but also to changing human abilities and characteristics. Against this backdrop, Kataka is a window into our future.
As the main character is a natural person (not a custom-built human), the film has a fairly negative attitude towards custom-built humans and the society in which they have become commonplace. The movie focuses on the unquantifiable “will” and “passion” of humans. And the “customized human” is portrayed as a threat to that. I, too, was moved by the will and passion of the main character, Vincent, while watching the movie. But even so, I don’t want to be as negative about custom humans as I am in the movie.
What is it that makes people think so negatively about personalized humans? I think it’s first and foremost the sense of inequality that underlies it. It’s the idea that some people should have it easy because they’re genetically engineered, and others should have a harder time because they’re born natural. While this is understandable, it’s easy to see that it’s a double standard in today’s world where we don’t have customized humans. For example, if you’re good-looking, you can become a celebrity that many people admire. Being tall is also an advantage for basketball or volleyball players. Crucially, in Korea’s air force academies, such as Kataka, one of the main factors for admission is eyesight.
Inequality based on genetic information is not just a future possibility. Even in today’s society, there are already inequalities of opportunity based on genetic information at birth, regardless of environment or individual effort. It’s just that instead of analyzing the genes themselves, we use the traits that are expressed by those genes. The reason for this inequality has nothing to do with whether a ‘customized human’ is possible or not. It’s simply that certain human characteristics, such as appearance, height, and vision, are almost entirely dependent on the genetic information we have at birth. This is unavoidable for us humans, who are born with a unique set of genetic information. People who are born with certain traits are socially accepted because there is a demand for them.
In addition, the ethical issue of genetic manipulation is an important one. The debate is still ongoing as to whether customized humans are morally justified. The long-term effects and potential risks of genetic modification on humanity are not yet fully understood. The potential for misuse of this technology and concerns that it could lead to further social and economic disparities are very real.
As you can see, social inequality based on genetic information is not the result of personalized humans. Rather, the demand for personalized humans is driven by the existence of social inequalities based on genetic information. If these inequalities already exist and are widespread in our society, why not reduce them through the introduction of customized humans? For example, the government could subsidize the cost of customized humans. In such a world, we would no longer have to experience inequality based on genetic information. It could be a world where everyone gets what they deserve based on their own merits. That’s the ideal world we’ve always wanted.
However, the reason why we are so negative about the idea of personalized humans despite this is because we are wearing tinted glasses. Many of our conventional beliefs are being challenged by personalized humans. It’s certainly not easy to change our mindset all at once, but I ask again. Is it right to leave the inequalities that exist because they are ‘natural’, or is it right to eliminate them through personalized humans? If the technology of personalized humans becomes possible in the distant future, we should not miss the opportunity to improve our lives and the society in which we live.
This discussion is not just about future scientific possibilities. It requires deep reflection on the nature of human existence and the kind of society we want to create. By considering the positive changes that personalized humans can bring, along with the moral and ethical challenges they pose, we will have to prepare for the future. Let’s hope that personalized humans are not just a product of scientific advancement, but a tool for a better society.
