Re: Therapeutic cloning - technical fix to one objection?

From: Damien Broderick (d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Sat May 25 2002 - 22:08:50 MDT


At 10:58 PM 5/25/02 -0400, Nick wrote:

>>Suppose you could tweak
>>some genes so that the foetus could not grow more than a basic brainstem,
>>just enough for vegetable survival. Such a being would also `not be a
>>potential person' but, rather, a kind of botched parody of a human.
>> [...] I think anyone here who finds
>>the idea appealing should consider a career in a concentration camp.

>I think you are grossly overstating the accusation against those who would
>find this idea acceptable.

I realize I put that rather strongly, and regret any implication that it
applied to *Nick*, whose following comments I mostly agree with.

>the yuk factor might
>be so extreme in this case that overriding it would constitute a greater
>assault on our sense of human dignity than the corresponding gains could
>justify. It seems far from clear-cut.

I was assuming for the sake of the thought experiment that it was `being
grown' not inside a vat, say, but inside a woman--since this comment was
made in the context of a discussion of what we might be able to do *soon*,
to disarm the objections of theologians. Not that growing headless humans
inside artificial wombs will win anyone a lot of support. I prefer to avoid
being chased down the street in a witch hunt if possible.

Damien Broderick



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:22 MST