This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

SnakesNDMartyrs
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 11:45 pm UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby SnakesNDMartyrs » Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:08 am UTC

Chen wrote:Is this really any different back when super rich families could give their child every monetary advantage? Personal tutors, computers, business contacts, personal trainers etc. I'd imagine things like these are STILL superior to good genetics when determining a child's success.


What good are any of the things you mentioned if your child has the mental capacity of a 5 year old? You can currently control the 'nurture' part of the equation with wealth but it is still fallible, once you can control the nature part as well you have the ability to create a human bound for success. Lower classes have little control over either and therefore the lower class children will be starting life off at an unsurmountable disadvantage. :cry:
An attempt to make a living at online poker: PokerAdept

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby iop » Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:52 am UTC

Buddha wrote:There is a whole host of wrong reasons to reproduce, traditionally or through cloning. We don't judge the former, so why should we judge the latter?

Do you think we should just say yes to any new technique irrespective of whether it is expected to bring more good or more bad?


Soralin wrote:
iop wrote:Why would anyone ever want to clone anybody, as opposed to having a child by currently available means?

Why would anyone ever want to have a child by the currently available means, as opposed to adopting?

I think there are a few additional reasons why one would want to have a child via currently available means opposed to adoption:
- It's much cheaper (the price difference is smaller for in vitro fertilization)
- It involves having sex (only for 'natural' reproduction)
- It involves much less paperwork
- Success rate is higher

However, especially for women who want a child without the hassle of pregnancy and who have the financial means to not have to worry about pesky problems like paperwork and waiting lists, adoption seems to have become quite fashionable - see Angelina Jolie and Madonna for prominent examples.

As you point out, an important difference between a clone and a 'traditionally' conceived child is that you can't quite know beforehand what you get, and thus, the expectations on what the child should (be) like are much more limited than with a clone.

superdemongob
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:21 pm UTC
Location: Vaults of Erebus, Tartarus

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby superdemongob » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:32 am UTC

Buddha wrote:There is a whole host of wrong reasons to reproduce, traditionally or through cloning. We don't judge the former, so why should we judge the latter?


and FYI, if this thread was about wrong reasons to reproduce we would still be just as judgmental. you're right, people abuse their reproductive capabilities but where does that get them?

And sort of what iop was saying, just because some people use a technology for wrong, does that make it ok for everybody to do it? in fact, does that make that specific usage of the technology ok?

Organ harvesting is done in some parts of the world, its really illegal, its not even done well but it is a practice that occurs. Does that mean that if i started an organ harvesting farm that its ok because those other guys are doing it?
Click on whichever appeals to you more:
Image Image Image Image
Image

Chen
Posts: 5581
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Chen » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:11 pm UTC

SnakesNDMartyrs wrote:
Chen wrote:Is this really any different back when super rich families could give their child every monetary advantage? Personal tutors, computers, business contacts, personal trainers etc. I'd imagine things like these are STILL superior to good genetics when determining a child's success.


What good are any of the things you mentioned if your child has the mental capacity of a 5 year old? You can currently control the 'nurture' part of the equation with wealth but it is still fallible, once you can control the nature part as well you have the ability to create a human bound for success. Lower classes have little control over either and therefore the lower class children will be starting life off at an unsurmountable disadvantage. :cry:


Its a matter of scale. When you compare Mr. Average to Mr. Super-intelligent, the difference in their successes is not nearly as dramatic as comparing Mr. Mentally disabled to Mr. Average. Raising the Rich to the super-intelligent while keeping the poor at average is probably not going to be as large an advantage as the other nurture advantages they already have. Remember too, the technology will not ALWAYS be only available to the rich. Personal computers used to be completely out of the price range of the average citizen. But they're ubiquitous now. Halting technology because of an initial divide between the rich and the poor in terms of accessibility to it, is not the way we should be moving forward.

janusx
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:46 pm UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby janusx » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:14 pm UTC

iop wrote:Why would anyone ever want to clone anybody, as opposed to having a child by currently available means? The only reason I can think of is that they want the clone because they like the original. Granted, there may be cases where parents who are both carriers of a recessive mutation for a debilitating disease (cystic fibrosis comes to mind) have a healthy child, and instead of having a CF child which they would abort, they would like to clone their kid. In my opinion (and I may be wrong), these cases will be a minority. Rather, people may want to have a clone because they want another talented/beautiful/cheerful/whatever copy (if it's not for the organs). Thus, the clone child - even more than a 'traditional' child in such an environment - will be not be considered an independent personality in their own right, but they'll be expected to grow up as a copy of the original.


An easy example would be a single woman who feels she has a fairly strong set of genes and doesn't trust the randomness of invitro fertilization. A clone would be a great fit there. (As well as the disease condition you listed). However, just because these conditions have cloning as an ideal option doesn't mean that cloning wouldn't be fine in other cases.

Also it would never be for organs. Period. We are getting close to the point today where we can do therapeutic cloning. Need a new liver? We can grow you a new cloned liver invitrio. The idea that you would raise a clone for organs works for movies: (see The Island) Makes for a decent movie plot, but really doesn't make sense in reality.

If/When cloning becomes a normal means of reproduction there will certainly be plenty of information available (there already is today) about just what a clone will and won't be. At the top of the list would be "A clone is an individual who shares another person's genes, nothing else". With the paperwork likely to be required, Doctors could easily inform everyone of what to expect. Thus the parents would be at least somewhat informed on the issue, and no one except the parent(s) would be able to tell that the clone is anything but another human individual.

User avatar
Buddha
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 3:17 am UTC
Location: The land of pure calculus.

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Buddha » Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:53 pm UTC

iop wrote:
Buddha wrote:There is a whole host of wrong reasons to reproduce, traditionally or through cloning. We don't judge the former, so why should we judge the latter?

Do you think we should just say yes to any new technique irrespective of whether it is expected to bring more good or more bad?


More along the lines of, it's immoral to judge method z, because for all intents and purposes, method x does the same thing, and we don't judge x.
Unless otherwise explicitly stated, I not a recognized authority in any field, nor am I a credible source.

User avatar
Shivahn
Posts: 2200
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 6:17 am UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Shivahn » Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:27 pm UTC

Buddha wrote:
iop wrote:
Buddha wrote:There is a whole host of wrong reasons to reproduce, traditionally or through cloning. We don't judge the former, so why should we judge the latter?

Do you think we should just say yes to any new technique irrespective of whether it is expected to bring more good or more bad?


More along the lines of, it's immoral to judge method z, because for all intents and purposes, method x does the same thing, and we don't judge x.


Do you mean inconsistent? Because yes, it would be, but I'd be willing to bet many of the people against letting this guy clone are also against letting bad parents have children, in theory. Even if not in practice, because that's... messy, and people don't want to deal with it.

User avatar
Buddha
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 3:17 am UTC
Location: The land of pure calculus.

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Buddha » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:38 pm UTC

Shivahn wrote:
Buddha wrote:
iop wrote:
Buddha wrote:There is a whole host of wrong reasons to reproduce, traditionally or through cloning. We don't judge the former, so why should we judge the latter?

Do you think we should just say yes to any new technique irrespective of whether it is expected to bring more good or more bad?


More along the lines of, it's immoral to judge method z, because for all intents and purposes, method x does the same thing, and we don't judge x.


Do you mean inconsistent? Because yes, it would be, but I'd be willing to bet many of the people against letting this guy clone are also against letting bad parents have children, in theory. Even if not in practice, because that's... messy, and people don't want to deal with it.


If you are unwilling to stop x, or even so much as try, stopping z, is immoral. You can't say that one means to an end is wrong, and the other is right when there is no real difference between the two.
Unless otherwise explicitly stated, I not a recognized authority in any field, nor am I a credible source.

User avatar
Shivahn
Posts: 2200
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 6:17 am UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Shivahn » Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:02 am UTC

Buddha wrote:If you are unwilling to stop x, or even so much as try, stopping z, is immoral. You can't say that one means to an end is wrong, and the other is right when there is no real difference between the two.


It's possible to be immoral by not stopping x, but moral in trying to stop z, even if they're similar. Let's say, for a ridiculous example, that you spend your days watching someone else torture both puppies and kittens. It is not immoral to say "You should stop torturing the kittens" without even talking about the puppies, or even condoning the puppy torture. It's probably inconsistent, and perhaps you're being immoral by condoning the puppy torture (depending on the moral system,) but that does not mean that it is more moral to do nothing than to stop this hypothetical man from torturing kittens.

Or for a more real world example, your logic leads directly to the conclusion that if you're not trying to stop war crimes based on diamond mines, that it is immoral to try and stop the war in the Congo based on other minerals.

That's what that first sentence implies. Looking at the second one, though, it's possible that I'm misunderstanding. If your point is that the means don't really matter, it's the end that matters, than I think most people would agree to you. No one here's simultaneously holding the position that people who would have kids for whatever reasons they believe are wrong should be allowed to while holding the position that having a cloned kid for wrong reasons should be disallowed.

Alx_xlA
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Alx_xlA » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:39 pm UTC

A cautionary tale:

During a press conference at a major university, a famous geneticist claimed that he had successfully cloned himself. The media, along with his fellow scientists, waited excitedly to learn more about his method, but after disappearing briefly into another room, he suddenly declared that the press conference was over and that he would not be doing any further research in cloning. A stunned silence washed through the room. The scientist rushed out the door and, not wanting to be seen, ran through the steam tunnels toward the building which housed his laboratory. He took the elevator up to the 14th floor, where his department was housed, and discovered that the door to the apartment which housed his clone was ajar. He turned to the end of the hallway and saw the clone leaning out of the window and yelling obscenities at passerby below. Panicking, he pushed the clone out of the window. Days later, when the body was discovered, the police were sent to arrest the scientist. They barged into his lecture and dragged him into the cruiser.

He was charged with making an obscene clone fall.
My signature contains forty-four characters.

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Sizik » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:37 pm UTC

Alx_xlA wrote:A cautionary tale:

During a press conference at a major university, a famous geneticist claimed that he had successfully cloned himself. The media, along with his fellow scientists, waited excitedly to learn more about his method, but after disappearing briefly into another room, he suddenly declared that the press conference was over and that he would not be doing any further research in cloning. A stunned silence washed through the room. The scientist rushed out the door and, not wanting to be seen, ran through the steam tunnels toward the building which housed his laboratory. He took the elevator up to the 14th floor, where his department was housed, and discovered that the door to the apartment which housed his clone was ajar. He turned to the end of the hallway and saw the clone leaning out of the window and yelling obscenities at passerby below. Panicking, he pushed the clone out of the window. Days later, when the body was discovered, the police were sent to arrest the scientist. They barged into his lecture and dragged him into the cruiser.

He was charged with making an obscene clone fall.


I don't get it.
she/they
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby Thesh » Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:51 am UTC

I don't think we should clone anyone. Sexual reproduction is more fun, less expensive, and contributes to evolution.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
styrofoam
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:28 am UTC

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby styrofoam » Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:26 am UTC

Thesh wrote:I don't think we should clone anyone. Sexual reproduction is more fun, less expensive, and contributes to evolution.

I see what you mean, but researching how to clone would contribute to our knowlege of the body (important for improving it). Same reason coders will write "reasearch OSs" to learn low-level system coding.
aadams wrote:I am a very nice whatever it is I am.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26830
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:47 am UTC

Thesh wrote:I don't think we should clone anyone. Sexual reproduction is more fun, less expensive, and contributes to evolution.
Two of those also apply to being mauled by bears. And two out of three ain't bad...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
smw543
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:45 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: This professor would like to clone himself. Thoughts?

Postby smw543 » Sat Jun 26, 2010 8:32 pm UTC

Sizik wrote:
Spoiler:
Alx_xlA wrote:A cautionary tale:

During a press conference at a major university, a famous geneticist claimed that he had successfully cloned himself. The media, along with his fellow scientists, waited excitedly to learn more about his method, but after disappearing briefly into another room, he suddenly declared that the press conference was over and that he would not be doing any further research in cloning. A stunned silence washed through the room. The scientist rushed out the door and, not wanting to be seen, ran through the steam tunnels toward the building which housed his laboratory. He took the elevator up to the 14th floor, where his department was housed, and discovered that the door to the apartment which housed his clone was ajar. He turned to the end of the hallway and saw the clone leaning out of the window and yelling obscenities at passerby below. Panicking, he pushed the clone out of the window. Days later, when the body was discovered, the police were sent to arrest the scientist. They barged into his lecture and dragged him into the cruiser.

He was charged with making an obscene clone fall.
I don't get it.

"Obscene phone call." Yeah...
Spoiler:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Now you know the difference between funny and sad.
Ubik wrote:But I'm too fond of the penis to let it go.
gmalivuk wrote:If you didn't want people to 'mis'understand you, then you probably should have tried saying something less stupid.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests