ankara has insightfully inserted:
> >A significant minority of those who took part in the survey - more than one
> >in five - felt that reproductive cloning could also be justified on medical
> >grounds, if for instance it was the only way for a couple to have a child of
> >their own.
>
> Would the couple really have their own child? ...only one of the couple
> would reproduce, that is, have their own clone. Why bother with
> 'coupledoom' at all?
Excellent questions, ankara. Perhaps the surveyed respondents felt that by the
time cloning becomes available to couples, genetic engineering can produce an
improved clone, i.e., one with just a touch of modification to amplify the
immune system, raise IQ, preclude defects, etc. Moreover, some DNA from the
uncloned parent could be combined with the cloned parent to birth a composite.
Why couple? Statistical evidence shows that children with two parents fare
better than those with only one.
> snip....
> >He said: "While there is likely to be a striking physical resemblance, the
> >clone would differ from the original in most of the higher mental attributes
> >that define an individual."
>
> I'm confused.... Is he referring to environmental influence on talent or
> personality? Or is he saying that indentical DNA may unfold in different
> patterns?
Yes, I think he's saying that, just as with identical twins (which are actually
clones of each other), discrete and independent personalities would develop
based on the fact that their respective brains would have their own individual
cognitive experience. Although their bodies would be identical, their
environments would not be. (In the case of clones, their environments could be
very different indeed.)
Identical DNA would *not* unfold in different patterns. Identical twins even
have identical moles and freckles.
> ...wonder if human cloning will become first choice for off-spring rather
> than mixing DNA. One, You'll know exactly what your getting: another
> chance. Second, Your need to sire offspring/reproduce will be satisfied
> completely. Third, You'll have a perfectly matched organ donor.
In a few decades, first choice for off-spring may well coincide with Moravec's
_Mind Children_ rather than with un-enhanced breeding. I don't think any of this
equals "another chance" because the world of the clone will be so different from
the parent's that whatever chance pertained to the parent will not apply to the
clone. In the future, if you truly love your children, you will probably opt not
to have any. The instinct to reproduce is not satisfied by the existence of
offspring, but rather by changes in hormonal composition and pheromone
interaction in parents.
Instead of using the clone for organ transplants, go ahead and use it for a
whole body transplant, because you'll need to direct your effort and energies
toward bringing about the technological singularity rather than on
overpopulating the world. Otherwise, it won't be a fit world to live in.
--J. R.
"We participate, therefore we are."
--John Seely Brown, _The Social Life of Information_
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:37:05 MDT