Human cloning: Three mistakes and an alternative

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (3):319 – 337 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The current debate on the ethics of cloning humans is both uninspired and uninspiring. In large measure this is because of mistakes that permeate the discourse, including the mistake of thinking that cloning technology is strictly a reproductive technology when it is used to create whole beings. As a result, the challenge this technology represents regarding our understanding of ourselves and the species to which we belong typically is inappropriately downplayed or exaggerated. This has meant that important (albeit disquieting) societal issues and species-type concerns have not been fully explored. This paper, intended as a corrective, suggests that we take an alternate view of human cloning as both an enhancement and a reproductive technology. This proposed shift in the framework for analysis counters the current narrow framing of the issues and introduces new questions about the prospect of modifying the species.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-05-07

Downloads
122 (#142,922)

6 months
8 (#292,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Françoise Baylis
Dalhousie University

References found in this work

What Sort of People Should There Be?Jonathan Glover - forthcoming - Philosophical Explorations.
"Goodbye Dolly?" The ethics of human cloning.J. Harris - 1997 - Journal of Medical Ethics 23 (6):353-360.
The Question of Human Cloning.John A. Robertson - 1994 - Hastings Center Report 24 (2):6-14.
Cloning: Then and Now.Daniel Callahan - 1998 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (2):141-144.
Ethical and Policy Issues in Human Embryo Twinning.Andrea L. Bonnicksen - 1995 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 4 (3):268.

View all 6 references / Add more references