DOC PREVIEW
MSU PHL 344 - Cloning

This preview shows page 1-2-3-24-25-26 out of 26 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 26 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

CloningArguments:The Xerox FallacyReal CloningReal Cloning-- IIReal Cloning-- IIIReal Cloning-- IVScary ScenariosPossible Real ScenarioConclusionsConclusions (cont.)Kass’s ArgumentKass’s False ViewKass’s False View-- IIKass’s “Warm-up”Repugnance Against CloningThree PerspectivesVague ChargesLegitimate ConcernsHow to Regard a Cloned Child?How to Regard a Cloned Child?-- IIOver-ArgumentOver-Argument-- IIValorization of Sexual ReproductionValorization of Sexual Reproduction-- IIKass’s ErrorsCloningWhat Is It Really?Assessing Kass’s ArgumentsArguments:There are very few if any good reasons to wish to clone a human being (as opposed to human cells)There are very few if any good reasons to be strongly opposed to cloning human beingsThe Xerox FallacyCloning a human being is like putting yourself in a Xerox machine and making multiple copiesReal CloningTake DNA from cell of adult humanTransfer DNA into an embryonic cell capable of undifferentiated divisionGrow a multicelled embryoImplant embryo into a female host (“surrogate mother”)Real Cloning-- IIGestate the embryo/fetus for 9 monthsDeliver newborn babyRaise the child to adulthood“Identity” of this person will be determined by complex interplay of genes and environmentReal Cloning-- IIIYour “clone” would be as much like you as your identical twin would be, if your identical twin was 20 years younger than you and raised by different parents in a different householdReal Cloning-- IVYour “clone” would be an independent person with full legal rights as a U.S. citizen, not your possession or “organ farm”Scary ScenariosWanting to raise a child who would be an exact copy of me“Organ farm” for transplantsRaise an army of automatons to fight a future warAll are unrealistic and depend on the Xerox FallacyPossible Real ScenarioParents are carriers for serious genetic diseaseWant to have a child who is genetically linked to one or both of themAny other method of natural or artificial reproduction would lead to a child who is affected by the diseaseConclusionsOnce people come to understand that the Xerox Fallacy is a fallacy, there will be very few cases where one would even consider cloning a human beingOnce we see how limited is the use of real cloning, we need hardly fear a massive movement (even if it is in fact a bad idea)Conclusions (cont.)Outlawing the cloning of humans is overkill, and may impede useful research if it fails to distinguish cloning entire humans from cloning cells and organsKass’s ArgumentKass is a well informed physician and does not believe the Xerox FallacyBut Kass seems to believe a false view of the “conservative” argument against a variety of new reproductive and other technologiesKass’s False ViewThe Ethical High Road:Thoughtful, nuanced analysisof long term subtle consequencesThe Ethical Low Road:Crude, short-sighted excitementabout immediate benefits (“gee whiz”)Kass’s False View-- IIThe “conservative” position (opposing a new technology) will always or almost always represent the Ethical High RoadThe position calling for acceptance of the new technology will almost always represent the Ethical Low RoadKass’s “Warm-up”Associates cloning with general breakdown of traditional religious and family values(Majority of) bioethicists have forgotten deeper issues and become fixated on mere procedural questionsRepugnance Against CloningNot by itself an argumentMay be a window into deeper wisdomHow we evaluate cloning:–Description–Context–ViewpointThree PerspectivesTechnological, liberal, melioristAll are distorted views of the true ethical and social meaning of a new lifeMistake to view birth and the meaning of a person through the lens of reductive science and potent technologyVague ChargesCloning threatens confusion of individuality and identityCloning violates human equality, freedom and dignityIf cloning is not Xeroxing, then exactly how does all this arise?Legitimate ConcernsRaises serious problems of lineage, biological kinship, social relationsRisks in the use of unproven technology on human infants without consentThese tend to argue against any widespread urge to clone humansHow to Regard a Cloned Child?“Gosh, kid, you sure are messed up; you’re the identical twin to one of your parents, and your individuality and identity are seriously in question”“Hi, kid, want to play Frisbee?”How to Regard a Cloned Child?-- IIWe are not helpless in the face of Kass’s serious concernsHow we nurture the child has a great deal to do with whether dire predictions come trueKass’s own approach threatens to insure a bad outcomeOver-ArgumentKass quotes Ramsey on turning “natural” baby-making into a factory-commodity modelRamsey was objecting to IVF in the 1970’sNo evidence that widespread use of IVF has produced any of the dire consequences Ramsey predictedOver-Argument-- IIKass’s argument against cloning could logically be extended to most if not all reproductive technologies used to treat infertilityTo say that all of these are grave threat to human values seems implausibleValorization of Sexual ReproductionTo have a baby the “natural” way is to demonstrate our humanity and our humilityTo clone a human being would be inherently exploitiveValorization of Sexual Reproduction-- IINumerous examples of exploitation of children born “naturally”–Parental pressure to conform to preset expectations–Sexual abuse of children by adultsHow plausible that cloning kids would lead to worse outcomes?Kass’s ErrorsNot the Xerox FallacyVague threats of harmSelf-fulfilling threats of harmOver-argumentValorization of “natural” sexual reproductionRaises some legitimate


View Full Document

MSU PHL 344 - Cloning

Download Cloning
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Cloning and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Cloning 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?