Thread: They cloned an extinct Goat! Sweet!

Extinct ibex is resurrected by cloning - Telegraph


So, I think it is now inevitable that one day we will be able to clone humans and/or make near-exact androids (Yeah, like in Bladerunner).

What i want to know is, is this morally wrong? My answer is that morals are relative.

But lets take a hypothetical situation: The future has clones and/or androids and you cannot indistinguish them from 'regular' humans. And someone kills one of those clones. Because these things were essentially grown or manufactured, would it just be like destroying someone's car?

Would it be homicide?

What is the borderline that makes something human? How would someone know if they are 'real' or not? Because if we could actually make replicants like that, then we would probably have insane memory implementation technology.

And without YOUr memories you are not you.

So yeah...I basically just ripped off 50 Sci-fi novels here, but oh well.

Originally Posted by hutchinson_3

Extinct ibex is resurrected by cloning - Telegraph


So, I think it is now inevitable that one day we will be able to clone humans and/or make near-exact androids (Yeah, like in Bladerunner).

What i want to know is, is this morally wrong? My answer is that morals are relative.

But lets take a hypothetical situation: The future has clones and/or androids and you cannot indistinguish them from 'regular' humans. And someone kills one of those clones. Because these things were essentially grown or manufactured, would it just be like destroying someone's car?

Would it be homicide?

What is the borderline that makes something human? How would someone know if they are 'real' or not? Because if we could actually make replicants like that, then we would probably have insane memory implementation technology.

And without YOUr memories you are not you.

So yeah...I basically just ripped off 50 Sci-fi novels here, but oh well.

A clone isn't the same as an android or robot. A clone is a copy. So if the original was a human the copy is a human and is afforded the same rights as any other human. If the human can ponder his own existence, then he exists, which I imagine a clone can do just as well as any other human.

As for androids, they are not human and are only capable of doing what they were programmed to do. If we program them to ponder their own existence then they are not pondering their own existence, they are running a program.

Originally Posted by johnflesh

A clone isn't the same as an android or robot. A clone is a copy. So if the original was a human the copy is a human and is afforded the same rights as any other human. If the human can ponder his own existence, then he exists, which I imagine a clone can do just as well as any other human.

As for androids, they are not human and are only capable of doing what they were programmed to do. If we program them to ponder their own existence then they are not pondering their own existence, they are running a program.

So who is more human? You or your copy and why?

And if we program an android to think that it is human, then how would you know if you are human or not and not just some android?

Originally Posted by hutchinson_3

So who is more human? You or your copy and why?

And if we program an android to think that it is human, then how would you know if you are human or not and not just some android?

Both are the same. Clone = copy. Copy = the same. If you clone a human, you get a human. No more or less human than the other. Its simple biology, much like pregnancy is simple biology.

If you program an android to think like a human it only needs to go beneath the skin to tell the difference. It would not need to ponder anything if it just cuts its own skin to find itself not bleeding, has no natural biological growth and processes, and was instead created by man outside of biology.

The only thing holding back the creation of androids is stability. As it is humans are very unstable and when robots are created, stability is usually the hardest feat to overcome. Until we have mastered the science and biology of humans and the human brain, eliminate human error, we will never be able to duplicate them thoroughly in the lab, without instability.

I'm sure the fact that its a goat they cloned will fit nicely in the objections of the religionists.

Who says that an android has to be made of machine?

like you said, pregnancy is like a biological copy. So why couldnt we just organically grow and engineer humans...but program their mind to be a certain way?

And a copy is not the original. Hence it is a copy, not the original.

It may have all the superficial qualities of the original, but there is always something that is different.

So whens the BarBQue? i'm hungry

Originally Posted by hutchinson_3

So who is more human? You or your copy and why?

You said they were indistinguishable.

If one were more human then in whatever way it was more human that would be a distinction. That is how you set it up.

Now in the real world when they cloned sheep the clone was genetically older than a newborn sheep would be. i.e. on the cellular level it was already as old as the mother from the first day.

I hear it feels like the real thing.
I wonder....

This is great news. In fact, I wish they'd really advance in this. Biotechnology is the next wave of advancement for humans.

I wanted to see them revive, or least, help preserve existing species that are nearly extinct, such as the White Rhino, or the Asian Bengal Tiger. Let's hope they don't just 'retrieve' such species, but also find a way to preserve them.