Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
For example, is the prospect of human cloning equal in repugnant value to "eating human flesh," as he suggests? (402). Another word he uses often is "horror." To wit, "Can anyone really give an argument fully adequate to the horror which is father-daughter incest (even with consent), or having sex with animals, or mutilating a corpse… or even just (just!) raping or murdering another human being?" (402). The horror of any of those acts can be linked to the horror of human cloning, according to Kass.
After spending the first few pages of his essay pointing to his contempt for the prospect of human cloning, on page 404 Kass flatly states that the process of setting up human cloning is already well underway. Making human children "artifacts" rather than loveable, playful little girls and boys, to serve human purposes, is a "violation of human equality, freedom...
Supply will create enormous demand," he writes; soon "established companies will have invested in the harvesting of eggs from ovaries obtained at autopsy" and donor tissues will be "stockpiled" (404). Alluding to the fact that surrogate-womb service companies are already well established -- and adding that human cloning is destined to follow -- Kass concludes that the "commodification of nascent human life will be unstoppable" (404).
Conclusion
Kass makes many good points, and his powerful objection to the idea of human cloning makes a strong impression on the reader, because his argument is based on moral revulsion and some logic. But his line of reasoning tends to stray into hyperbole; in other words, he seems caught up in showing how literate he can be. Moreover, Kass is wrong in saying that the mass-producing of humans through cloning is a foregone conclusion. It is not an industry that the United States leadership will allow to flourish. The most practical solution he raises is his call for an international legal ban on human cloning (406). In that he is correct.
Works Cited
Kass, Leon R. The Wisdom of Repugnance.…
Works Cited
Kass, Leon R. The Wisdom of Repugnance. The New Republic. (1997): 17-26.
Human Cloning The Cloning of Human Beings Cloning is the creation of an exact biological twin generated from the DNA of a donor. In effect, a person creates an exact copy, with the exact genetic sequence, from their own DNA. While the cloning of human beings has been the realm of science fiction, the creation of sheep clones has pushed the idea of human cloning into the range of possibilities. At present,
Human Cloning The subject of human cloning was once the stuff of science fiction novels and television programs. As technology and science improves, the creation of clones has become, potentially, a real likelihood in the impending future. For the follow, the definition of human cloning is that which has been designated by the American Medical Association: The term "cloning" will refer to the production of genetically identical organisms via somatic cell nuclear
Human Cloning The debate over human cloning generally assumes it's possible to safely clone a completely normal human being, and ignores the multitude of problems that routinely plague the process of cloning animals. The current definition of 'successful cloning' is the generation of a viable adult organism (Gurdon and Melton, 1811), a definition used rather loosely given the prevalence of defects that occur. As discussed below, this definition has been traditionally
It focuses on the controversy, and provides answers to the question of whether or not stem cell research is providing the benefits in the ways in which the public believes they will soon be benefiting from the research. The authors contend that partisan responses to the public's concerns over stem cell research are delaying the benefits of much needed treatments and cures that can be derived from stem cell research
Human Cloning Debate When Frankenstein was adapted for stage in 1823 the production's title was Presumption; or, The Fate of Frankenstein. A Victorian audience was concerned with the theme of a man's ambition to replace God by creating a new species. Equal emphasis was placed on this aspect of the novel in the 1831 introduction of Frankenstein, "It is Mary Shelly's critique of where such highly abstracted creative powers can lead
(Weiler, 1998) Weiler states that in relation to the offspring the following must be examined closely: 1) a single parent (genetically) of the offspring which is at the same time a genetic sibling. This issue parallels the non-zygotic fertilization; 2) Multiple twinship. Cloning a number of brothers or sisters from the same cell is similar to the case of twins only more extreme due to the intervention occurring in the process of