PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11684768

[Could human cloning make us happy?].

Abstract

The idea of making mankind happy by cloning is entertained only by who reduce anything alive first to ,, a self-organizing system of cells", then to ,, a set of elements" and finally to ,,the material for something". Such ontological blindness justifies all cases of manipulating what ever is alive including human life in its initial stages. From a biological point of view, cloning involves manipulating living genetic material. When judging this procedure, one must not solely consider the technical possibilities; we need to take into account the moral point of view as well. Tampering with genetic material - the human genome especially - is morally disputable as it distorts the values of natural biological order, which has not been created by man himself. The value of this natural order, and, in the case of man, human dignity - though invisible, unmeasurable, and unobservable at its beginning- constitutes the boundaries no scientist should transgress especially if he/she is a person with a moral conscience.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Siemianowski. 2001. [Could human cloning make us happy?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11684768/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

High hopes and automatic escalators: a critique of some new arguments in bioethics.

Two protechnology arguments, the "hopeful principle" and the "automatic escalator", often used in bioethics, are identified and critically analysed in this paper. It is shown that the hopeful principle is closely related to the problematic precautionary principle, and the automatic escalator argument has close affinities to the often criticised empirical slippery slope argument. The hopeful principle is shown to be really hopeless as an argument, and automatic escalator arguments often lead nowhere when critically analysed. These arguments should therefore only be used with great caution.

Bioethics↗