"Military possibilities (Army of "supermen", small elite force with similar/identical thought processes)"
This is sounding distrurbingly similar to the views of cloning I get from a lot of people, and it reflects a couple of major misconceptions that movies like "The 6th Day" perpetuate upon the public.
1) Cloning != "Humans grown in vats" (shades of Cyteen, for anyone who's read Cherryh). A cloned human needs to be gestated just like anyone else, born just like anyone else. There's no military value to be gained by raising an army of clones, as you'd have to find women to give birth to them, and spend around twenty years raising them.
2) Cloning != genetic manipulation. A cloned human would be genetically identical to the person cloned. If you had a "superman" and cloned him, you might get an army of supermen - but that's a nature vs. nurture argument. Cloning alone will not create supermen.
3) Cloning != replicating a person down to their thought processes. It seems obvious (to me, at least) that thought processes are not based on some deterministic interpretation of your genes. Even twins (nature's clones) don't usually have identical thought processes - they tend to be similar, if the twins were raised together (and hence had similar experiences and upbringings), and just as different as any other two people, if they were not. Again, there's not a lot of military value to cloning a person a few dozen times and raising all the resulting babies in exactly the same way - for one thing, taking a bunch of non-cloned babies and raising them identically would probably have similar results, and for another, can you envision the resources it would take? You'd have to control every conversation the children ever had, every accident that ever happened to them. The cost-benefit analysis shows this is not only impossible, it's worthless.
In conclusion, clones are the same as twins. To envision what a cloned human would be like in relation to their parent, think about twins who were raised separately. In this case, the clone has been "time-shifted" as well as "space-shifted" from their twin, but the idea is the same. I think one of the reasons so many people are opposed to cloning is due to one or more the misconceptions I've outlined above - at least, in my experience, when discussing cloning with someone who's against it, when I make those points, they run out of ammo. (Except for the guy who started talking about how he needed to feel genetically unique - until I pointed out that he had a twin brother....)
Now, the point that we don't have a very good success rate yet is a valid one - but it's a point for waiting, not for turning away from cloning altogether...
All your .sigs are belong to us.
remove mypants to email
[ Parent ]