Ethics_of_Human_Cloning

The Ethics of Human Cloning When examining the ethics of human cloning through the perspective of Emmanuel Levinas, it is easy to see why it is unethical. There are two methods of cloning humans, natural cloning and nuclear transplantation. (Dudley 6) With the advances in cloning technology, the ethics of human cloning have now come into debate. Levinas believed that the good is interested in what is absolutely unique about each person or thing. He also believed that unique people or things contain traces of God. Cloning would greatly affect the uniqueness and individuality of human beings. Levinas also recognized the importance of the face and how it makes people responsible. To clone a human could require killing many embryos and this would be denying unique traces of God. Based on Levinas’ key ethical principles, he would find human cloning highly unethical. There are two methods of cloning in higher animals and possibly humans. The first method is naturally when a women gives birth to identical twins or triplets. Natural cloning cannot be unethical because it is what god willed. This is caused by the cell splitting in early development. The other highly controversial method of cloning is nuclear transplantation. This involves the nucleus of a cell (contains all genetic info) being transplanted into or fused with an egg in which its nucleus has been removed. After this transplantation, the cell is stimulated into growth with electric shot and a real fertilized egg begins to grow, an embryo. (Dudley 6) Some scientists also assert that cloning could result in deformed or defective babies. (DuPrau 48) Levinas would acknowledge an embryo as a unique human being. Cloning would involve destroying many embryos and to Levinas, this would mean the senseless killing of many traces of God. In early 1997, Scottland researchers used nuclear transplantation to clone an adult sheep named Dolly. There was an extremely high failure rate and it took 277 attempts to clone the sheep. The other cells failed to develop or had abnormalities that proved fatal. A woman trying to have a cloned child might have to undergo many miscarriages before holding a live baby. Based on this, Levinas would say that using this method to try and clone humans is unacceptable. By trying this on humans, it shows great disrespect for humanity and the other and it would ultimately destroy traces of God. Even if a human was successfully cloned, nobody knows the long term effects and the clone may end up with fatal health problems or premature aging issues. (Dudley 13) There are also worries that cloning could ruin traditional family relations. For example, a clone could be a person’s child and also their twin sibling. There can also be a psychological impact on the clone that would give it a diminished sense of individuality and the clone may feel pressure to live the same fate as its cell donor. (Dudley 13) “A child begotten can always be seen as a gift, where as a child made or manufactured can always be seen as a thing - a product for use not to be respected for what he/she is, but priced for what it can do.” – Catholic Archbishop John O’Connor (Dudley 8) Parents may also want to make designer children by purchasing genes of desirable donors. (Dudley 8) Levinas would view this as taking away from what is absolutely unique about each person and uniqueness is what the good is interested in. Parents might also value their child according to how close it meets expected specifications. (Dudley 13) Levinas sees the face as highly ethical and therefore being able to predict how a child will look at different stages in their life is extremely unethical, also taking away from their experience of the other. Levinas places great importance on not being able to reduce another person’s face to being the same as any other face. Other than the use of cloning as a means for infertile couples to have babies, many scientists believe that cloning could be used for therapeutic reasons. Clones made for therapeutic reasons would be used strictly as organ donors. (Dudley 30) This would be highly unethical to Levinas because it is denying the rights of the other, who is a stranger that is totally defenceless. The face of the other demands that you recognize it and provide it with the respect it deserves. Cloning may benefit individuals but in the long run, cloning undermines the advance of humanity. (Dudley 30) Cloning for therapeutic reasons is ignoring the face of the other and destroying traces of God. The process is also denying a touch of God’s infinite goodness. Some scientists say that if research could help cure diseases and repair damaged spines, then the benefits would outweigh any moral rejection. (Dudley 32) However cloning human embryos for strictly research and cell cultivation creates, exploits and destroys human lives. (Dudley 45) Destroying these embryos would be seen by Levinas as exploiting and destroying traces of the good or God. With the development of cloning combined with advances in genetic engineering may lead to selective breeding. For example, geniuses could be cloned in large numbers. People could be created to be healthier and smarter or for war and slavery. With these capabilities, there is also a threat of someone attempting to create a “master race”. (Dudley 33) Levinas would find selective breeding greatly immoral because he states that the singularity of a person is what gives them their identity. To Levinas, it is the differences among people that make them good. Based on the philosophy of Levinas, he would find the cloning of humans a very unethical act. These potential clones would be real humans and they would be denied their individuality and uniqueness. Human cloning is also very uncertain and would likely cause the death of many embryos. Not only would the clone be prone to unknown risks, but the means used to obtain the clone is highly unethical. Every embryo would grow up to be a unique individual and so destroying them is actually destroying traces of the good or God. If cloning ever became a safe and popular way to conceive children it could have a huge impact on the uniqueness of humans. Levinas would agree that no one should be able to know exactly what a human will look like before it is even born. This would greatly undermine humanity and take away from the experience of the human face. The good is infinite and is always one step ahead of humans; therefore people should not be destroying the traces of the good that God leaves behind.