Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on the process of cloning
Genetic modification and society in a brave new world
Dangers of cloning on human lives
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on the process of cloning
The Science of Cloning
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.
Human cloning is one of the most controversial subjects in modern times. Supporters claim that cloning is a great advance in science and can lead to great discoveries and medical breakthroughs. Opponents feel that cloning is a threat to human individuality and is potentially disastrous. Both sides make reasonable arguments, however I feel that Wesley takes things a bit too far in his grim outlook on the future of humanity. Sure, there are downsides to cloning, and yes it can be dangerous if it is used for the wrong purposes. This is true with almost any new technology. From gunpowder to cars to airplanes to computers to the Internet; any one of these technologies can be harnessed for negative purposes. Despite the risks involved however, all of these technologies have improved our standard of living and quality of life, and I feel cloning will do the same.
Wesley J. Smith goes on and on about how eugenicists would want to create homogeneity among Humans, valuing traits such as intelligence and looks instead of love, compassion, and empathy. He feels that this would create an unnatural society of human beings, creating chaos among the world. What he fails to recognize however is that it is not nearly as simple to do this as he thinks. Right now, cloning is in its very elementary stages, and most research being done is for medical purposes. Through advancing our knowledge in cloning and genetic engineering, we can eliminate unwanted traits and genetic diseases. Wesley may then try to argue that these unwanted traits and diseases make us unique, but I doubt he will get much support, especially from somebody who suffers from some horrible genetic disease or deformity.
Wesley then uses nature itself in his arguments by stating: “Eugenics, as awful as it is, is only the beginning of the threat posed to the natural order by human cloning”.
Eugenics, the set of beliefs and practices which aim at improving the genetic quality of the human population played a significant role in the history and culture of United States prior to its involvement in World War Two. (Wiki) Gilman is the writer of late 19th and early 20th century and during this century which is known as progressive era, Eugenics was considered a method of preserving and improving the dominant groups in the population. The idea of Eugenics was brought up by Sir Francis Galton in America. They think that by the idea of eugenics there will be a development in a society. America also made American Breeder’s Association which later on founded the Eugenics Record office, and with certain mission and, in their mission statement, they wrote: Society must protect itself; as it claims the right to deprive the murder of his life so it may also annihilate the hideous serpent of hopelessly vicious protoplasm. Here is where appropriate legislation will aid in eugenics and creating a healthier, saner society in the
The objective of this essay is to inform the reader(s) about human cloning. I believe that human cloning is morally wrong because one should not have the right to avoid daily responsibilities by getting someone else to handle them. There will be four sections of this paper that will be discussed. Firstly, there is an argumentative section, which will have premises along with a conclusion for an argument made against human cloning. Secondly, an explanation section, which explains how the argument against human cloning obeys the rules for a good argument. Thirdly, an objection section to where there are arguments that violates mine in order to demonstrate how objectors might object to the argument. Lastly, there will be a conclusion where I discuss
Cloning is a DNA sequence, such as a gene, that is transferred from one organism to another and replicated by genetic engineering techniques. This means to reproduce or propagate asexually and some sexually. Cloning is made when you have several embryos and you try to duplicate them to produce more eggs which is called SCNT. SCNT (Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer) is used so that they can take a piece of DNA from an egg and transfer it to another egg after the nucleus has been eliminated by an ultra violet beam. This technique is really hard to accomplish but can be done by well experienced scientists. There are many reasons why scientist would like to clone, and two of the main reasons are finding a cure to certain types of diseases and helping the endangered species come back to life like they once were.
Eugenics is the future of modifying the Human body naturally with no injections or experimental drugs necessary. This could lead to the best version of the human race that has walked this planet. This could make the world all of us live in a disease free world full of healthy people. According to Biograpghy.com Eugenics got
D'souza makes the argument that the techno-utopians idea of cloning and genetic engineering will lead to a future where children have their traits selected for them creating a new form of eugenics where you are discriminated not against skin color, but instead against your genotype. He raises the concern however, that while the techno-utopians make the claim that it genetic modifications wouldn't be used until they were safe, that doesn't assure that there won't be any problems.
“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.
During WWII, the practice of eugenics was generally understood as ranking human reproduction such that more of the desired heritable traits would be passed down to the next generation. Nazi policies led to the persecution and ultimately, the genocide of Jews, disabled people, and other minorities perceived to be ‘inferior’ by Nazi ‘Aryan’ ideology. These actions constitute a crime against humanity and represent one of the darkest chapters in humanity. From the average perspective, the process of eugenics is widely discredited as both unscientific and racially biased. The race for engineering modifications of organisms may bring the downfall of humanity, bringing unwanted risks and health problems down the road.
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.
When created in 1923, the American Eugenics Society exemplified an air of reform with a seemingly positive purpose, however this cannot be further from the truth. In reality, the society polluted the air with myths of weeding out imperfections with the Galtonian ideal, the breeding of the fittest (Carison). The founder of the society, Charles Davensport , preached that those who are imperfect should be eliminated(Marks). From the school desk to the pulpit, the fallacies of the eugenics movement were forced into society. Preachers often encouraged the best to marry the best while biology professors would encourage DNA testing to find out ones fate (Selden). A...
Every now and then, there emerges a great idea that changes they way we view and interact with the world for the better. Many times however, it takes an idea with catastrophic consequences to stimulate society to make a positive change. Eugenics is one of these ideas. It was an idea based on faulty ideas of human heredity, the assumption that man himself can change his evolutionary destiny, and was fueled by prejudice and hate. In the end however, its pseudo-scientific and deceptive nature was revealed to the people, and a path to true understanding of heredity was paved.
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
The use of eugenics is not a guaranteed process. There is no such thing as a perfect person. Therefore, you cannot create one by only using educated, wealthy, or desirable people. The truth is, a person with all the right traits or genes could produce a mentally ill child. On the other hand, a person with a mental illness, or an undesirable trait could produce a smart, attractive, desired child. All people are born the same, the choices you make and the way you are raised make you who you are. We are all born with the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Consequently, eugenics is trying to take the right of a person to bear children away because of their place in life.
New technological advances are being mad every day, especially in genetics. With great innovations comes concerns whether it will have a good cause or be used for bad intentions. One of these is eugenics, the idea to improve genetic composition in humans most specifically in future fetuses. The idea started in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton who wanted to selectively breed humans using desired traits to create a perfect human race. This lead to many unethical moments in history such as the sterilization of unfit humans in the 19th century as well as Hitler’s use of eugenics during WWII. However, current use helps identify possible inherited diseases/conditions in unborn children and remove those traits from the DNA. Although eugenics has been used
If you could selectively choose the characteristics of your offspring, would you? Genetic engineering has made this globally possible, giving parents access to genetic modification to enhance or modify characteristics of an individual gene. This new technology can benefit families in the prevention of many genetic diseases, but the applied science can also create terrible problems across the world such as overpopulation, due to the disappearance of these disorders, and a single, master race due to the accessible selection of preferred traits in the lab. Although this scientific advancement can aid us in the future, this should not be the path that of our future takes due to the excessive amount of disorder it will cause.