cloning what is it really? assessing kass’s arguments
TRANSCRIPT
Cloning
What Is It Really?
Assessing Kass’s Arguments
Arguments:
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 beings
The Xerox Fallacy
Cloning a human being is like putting yourself in a Xerox machine and making multiple copies
Real 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 environment
Real 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 household
Real 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 Fallacy
Possible 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 disease
Conclusions
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 organs
Kass’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 technologies
Kass’s False View
The Ethical High Road:Thoughtful, nuanced analysisof long term subtle consequences
The 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 Road
Kass’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 questions
Repugnance Against Cloning
Not by itself an argument May be a window into deeper wisdom How we evaluate cloning:
– Description– Context– Viewpoint
Three 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 technology
Vague 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 humans
How 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 outcome
Over-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 predicted
Over-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 implausible
Valorization 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 exploitive
Valorization 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 concerns