Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to how scientific discoveries alter human life
Essays about the possible implications of cloning in society and the ethical issues it raises
Essays about the possible implications of cloning in society and the ethical issues it raises
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Injustice of Cloning “Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity. In arguing against cloning, the central debate is derived from the fact that this unnatural process is simply unethical. The alleged …show more content…
In essence, the long-term effects of cloning are completely unknown. When studying cloning, we may see its desirable effects, but we neglect its many unknown effects. At the mention of cloning, many may contemplate Mary Shelley’s famous novel Frankenstein. Although fictional, the novel does show some truth. In the novel, Shelley warns of the dangers that come as a repercussion of knowledge, with Victor Frankenstein’s dialogue “seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries.” (Shelley) Today, we find ourselves debating similar ethical issues that Mary Shelley considered long ago. With so many incredible discoveries that lie in our future, we must also consider the responsibilities that come with these discoveries. If not, we may suffer the same fate as Victor Frankenstein had in the novel
Children grow up watching movies such as Star Wars as well as Gattaca that contain the idea of cloning which usually depicts that society is on the brink of war or something awful is in the midsts but, with todays technology the sci-fi nature of cloning is actually possible. The science of cloning obligates the scientific community to boil the subject down into the basic category of morality pertaining towards cloning both humans as well as animals. While therapeutic cloning does have its moral disagreements towards the use of using the stem cells of humans to medically benefit those with “incomplete” sets of DNA, the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the disagreements indubitably due to the fact that it extends the quality of life for humans.
Victor Frankenstein in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, started out as an intelligent young man that increasingly grew into an even more curious young man. His interest in the human body and creating life became almost became an obsession for him. He was determined to do what he needed to do in order to create the most incredible clone of a human. Victor went to great lengths to complete this occupation of his that took up nearly all of his time, including many nights of visiting the graveyards studying the human corpses. Getting the body parts was the easy part of this upcoming creation, it was going to be all the sleepless days and nights trying to create the veins, blood vessels, etc., that would be the challenging part of this whole ordeal.
In every aspect of our lives we have a choice that can determine our dishonorable effort
Proponents of cloning humans today should remind themselves of the lesson of Victor Frankenstein before they have to deal with the products of their research and learn the hard way. & nbsp;
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
Monsters, in myths and legends, are ugly beasts with vicious tendencies and overbearing powers who bring suffering and agony to those who cross their paths, regardless of intention. However, the same cannot be said for Mary Shelley's monster, the Creation. Victor Frankenstein's lab experiment emphasizes the danger of not taking responsibility for one's own actions and knowledge, by being an instrument of Victor's suffering.
Cloning is, and always has been an extremely contentious topic. To some, the ethical complications surrounding it, are far more promiscuous than what scientists and medical experts currently acknowledge. Cloning is a general term that refers to the process in which an organism, or discrete cells and genes, undergo genetic duplication, in order to produce an identical copy of the original biological matter. There are two main types of artificial cloning; reproductive and therapeutic, both of which present their respective benefits and constraints. This essay aims to discuss the various differences between the two processes, as well as the ethical issues associated with it.
Mary Shelley expresses various ethical issues by creating a mythical monster called Frankenstein. There is some controversy on how Mary Shelley defines human nature in the novel, there are many features of the way humans react in situations. Shelley uses a relationship between morality and science, she brings the two subjects together when writing Frankenstein, and she shows the amount of controversy with the advancement of science. There are said to be some limits to the scientific inquiry that could have restrained the quantity of scientific implications that Mary Shelley was able to make, along with the types of scientific restraints. Mary Shelley wrote this classic novel in such a way that it depicted some amounts foreshadowing of the world today. This paper will concentrate on the definition of human nature, the controversy of morality and science, the limits to scientific inquiry and how this novel ties in with today’s world.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
“I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other.”
Evil is never a direct intention, but a byproduct of a search for something greater. The intent of an action illustrates the true nature of a person, no matter the end result. True hypocrisy is shown in a modern society when an end result is mistaken for the intent of an action. In Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, both Victor Frankenstein and the monster are judged on the end result of their actions, not their intent. They both, under different circumstances, could be written as a hero or anti-hero. In Frankenstein, the reader judges Frankenstein and the monster by the result of their actions, selfishness, and perspective.
Dr. Frankenstein did not use the process of cloning, but the idea of creating life in an artificial manner translates quite clearly. Cloning is considered an artificial method of reproduction. The intentions behind cloning are often very sincere and righteous, providing breakthroughs in pathology and disease research. The question of ethics arises with the question: Do the ends justify the means? Firstly, our current methods of cloning are inefficient, as “The success rate ranges from 0.1 percent to 3 percent” (Utah University). Often times, experiments of cloning are unsuccessful, leading to animals that are deformed or suffer from medical issues. This fact provides a parallel between Frankenstein and modern culture, leading to Frankenstein’s application as a modern myth. Interpreting the monster as a modern day, cloned, deformed creature provides an alternate perspective to the benefits of animal cloning. Based on the example of Frankenstein’s monster, the decision of whether or not to clone animals becomes quite cut and dry, that such scientific practices are inhumane and should not be practiced. Yet there are also some major benefits that have already arisen from cloning. Stem cells are somatic cells in a primitive state, where they can grow into many different types of cells. In an explanation for some of the benefits of cloning, the following example is given, “These cells [stem cells] could then
In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein secretly creates a monster without considering the consequences. After the creation of the monster and throughout Victor’s life he and the monster suffer constantly. Because Victor keeps his monster a secret from his family, friends and society, he is alone and miserable. The monster is also alone and miserable because he is shunned by society due to his grotesque appearance.
Secondly, “the most the human race has to loose by playing around with cloning is that the genetic diversity would be lost (Andrea Castro, 2005).” Reducing the genetic differences will produce clones that are grossly overlarge, many animals will be born with genetic mutations, and there will be a higher “risk of disease transfer (Saskaschools, 2003). “A review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every one of them is genetically and physically defective (Leake, 2002).” Mutations will be passed on to the younger generation because if a cloned species has a mutation in their DNA this mutation will be passed on. Cloning has been linked with diseases of ageing, arthritis and, cancer.
"Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry." The President's Council on Bioethics Washington, D.C. N.p., July-Aug. 2002. Web.