A

Study Notes on the Moral Status of Cloning Humans by Michael Tooley

Moral Status of Cloning Humans

Overview of Michael Tooley's Position

  • Tooley, a professor of philosophy at the University of Colorado, presents a perspective on the moral status of cloning humans, focusing on two primary conclusions:

    1. There is nothing intrinsically immoral about human cloning.

    2. Cloning promises potential benefits for society.

  • The transcript begins with dialogues referencing the ethical implications raised by Leon Kass and provides a range of perspectives on cloning's moral status.

Leon Kass's Viewpoints on Cloning

Key Questions for Analysis

  1. Kass's Critique of Approaches to Cloning

    • Claims that "technical, liberal, and meliorist approaches" overlook deeper anthropological, social, and ontological meanings.

    • Deeper meanings may refer to the intrinsic value of human life, identity, and the role of family in a person's life.

  2. Cloning as Despotism

    • Kass states that cloning represents a form of despotism due to the control it exerts over genetic outcomes and individual identity.

    • Discussion on whether this characterization of cloning is justified.

  3. Role of Sexual Reproduction in Higher Life Forms

    • Kass believes that higher forms of animal life could not exist without sexual reproduction, charging cloning with undermining diversity and evolution.

  4. Identity and Individuality Issues

    • Cloning raises questions regarding identity, individual autonomy, and the psychological implications of clones reminding society of genetic determinism.

  5. Slippery Slope Argument

    • Kass contends that the idea of reproductive freedom leads to clones, pointing to a slippery slope in moral reasoning.

    • Discussion on whether there is agreement with this view.

  6. Ethical Implications of Embryonic Clone Research

    • While recognizing potential benefits from embryonic research, Kass believes such research should be restricted due to ethical concerns.

  7. Reproduction vs. Manufacture

    • Discussion on whether cloning is an act of reproduction or a form of manufacture, considering the nature of life.

The Case for Cloning by Michael Tooley

Intrinsic Morality of Cloning

  • Tooley argues against the view that cloning is intrinsically immoral. He presents six key points:

Arguments Against the Right to Unique Individuality

  1. Unique Individuality and Moral Worth

    • Many believe uniqueness is vital for the value of life. Tooley questions if having a "perfect clone" diminishes life’s worth.

    • Argues that uniqueness must be differentiated from similar genetic makeups and considers the role of life experiences.

  2. Numerical Data on Personality Traits

    • Average correlation of personality traits among identical twins is approximately 50%, suggesting that clones would likely differ due to unique life experiences despite genetic similarities.

  3. Religious Considerations

    • Appeals to theist perspectives questioning how a God-inflicted world allows for identical twins if genetic uniqueness is morally crucial.

  4. Self-Protection and Rationality of Rights

    • Questions whether a right to genetically unique individuals is valid when the mere existence of a clone may not harm individual interests, particularly if harm arises from irrational beliefs about genetic determinism.

  5. Hypothetical Scenarios

    • Constructs scenarios of identical genetic clones, comparing possible favorable outcomes of controlled environments and genetic similarity.

The Open Future Argument

  • Discusses Joel Feinberg's concept of a right to an open future, suggesting that knowledge of clones constrains life choices. Tooley counters, asserting that clones could serve as positive examples rather than constraints.

Considerations in Support of Cloning Humans

Potential Benefits of Cloning

  • Tooley outlines a number of informed benefits from cloning:

  1. Advancement of Scientific Knowledge

    • Cloning could enhance psychological research on heredity versus environment, aiding child-rearing approaches.

  2. Improvement of Society

    • While as a general theory cloning great individuals like Einstein is flawed, some cloning may yield significant contributions by controlling environments during upbringing.

  3. Healthier Individuals

    • Cloning could increase the odds of producing healthier offspring with positive genetic traits (e.g., decreased susceptibility to diseases).

  4. Satisfying Childrearing

    • Cloning could allow for the birth of children with desired attributes, enhancing familial satisfaction.

  5. Interest-Based Childrearing

    • Knowledge from one parent about the qualities of their upbringing could influence healthier child development and parenting experience.

  6. Infertility Solutions

    • Prospects for aiding couples with reproductive challenges through cloning as a viable option to ensure biological connection.

  7. Children for Same-Sex Couples

    • Cloning may offer homosexual couples biological children that relate to both partners.

  8. Cloning to Save Lives

    • Specific cases like generating genetic matches for organ transplants highlight potential critical benefits of cloning.

Objections to Human Cloning

Moral Concerns and Ethical Implications

  1. Cloning of Mindless Organ Banks

    • The objection arises from the fear of dehumanizing individuals viewed as mere sources of organs, which is criticized but justified regarding autonomy and soul concepts.

  2. Violation of Rights

    • Concerns about cloning infringing rights to individuality or future autonomy are addressed and rebutted.

  3. Brave New World Scenarios

    • Skepticism towards dystopian views of cloning serving as slavery or manipulation; the implausibility of large-scale abuse underlies this argument.

  4. Psychological Distress Argument

    • This argument revolves around potential feelings of inadequacy or lack of uniqueness among clones, which Tooley counters as largely based on irrational beliefs.

  5. Failure to Treat as Ends in Themselves

    • Questions arise regarding whether clones are treated as means instead of ends; Tooley defends that love and care of the cloned child remains likely, contrary to objectors.

  6. Interference with Personal Autonomy

    • Concerns expressed about creating individuals with pre-defined attributes; Tooley argues personal development is part of parental roles and not necessarily coercive.

Conclusion

  • The overall conclusion drawn by Tooley posits that cloning human beings is not intrinsically immoral, nor should it be dismissed due to prevailing societal concerns. Both cloning for useful purposes and producing persons through cloning hold significant potential societal benefits.