What are the implications of continued research into cloning?

Recently, cloning has stepped into the limelight. Although cloning of plants from adult plant cells has been practised for many years now, it never received the attention that cloning does now. What, then, has warranted this fresh interest in cloning? It is the crossing of what was once thought to be an impassable barrier --- the possibility of animal cloning. With the announcement of the success in the cloning of a sheep, the immediate implications were that of human cloning.

Although many scientists have pointed out that the actual substantial benefits of animal cloning lie mostly in the agricultural realm, this has been largely ignored by the media and the general public. The impending possibility of human cloning has cast a shadow over the solutions that cloning can offer to problems such as Third World famines and the conservation of biodiversity that were once considered as pressing. Why is this so?

It is simply because human cloning has overwhelming implications. Its mere possibility raises fundamental questions such as "What makes one human?" and "What is the right to be free?" that have been hotly debated by philosophers since the dawn of time. What is more important is that members of the public who would rather ignore these questions now find a need to answer them.

Continued research into cloning has the most implications in research into human cloning. Even before human cloning is possible, a question arises in the process of starting research in that area, that of experiments on humans. Society's belief that human life is sacrosanct and that no one has a right to toy with another's life is evidenced by public horror at tales of medical experiments on unknowing humans such as the recently revealed case of leaving syphilis untreated in black males in America.

Research into cloning will inevitably meet with failures and setbacks, very likely involving the loss of human life in the form of cells and embryos. Once again we are faced with a question already hotly debated in the issue of abortion - at what point does a foetus become human? The loss of life through this research is a major implication that is posed to halt any research in this direction. But then, the possible benefits of such research forces us to consider what the value is of a human life. Should we continue with such research if it were to save lives in the future?

Before we can even contemplate this question fairly we need to see what actual human cloning might result in. Obviously, we would be able to obtain genetically identical individuals. This opens up a whole new world of possibilities. For once, the debate over how environment affects human behaviour can be resolved. The use of twins in studies of how different environments affect thought and behaviour is not novel, but with human cloning, such studies could be carried out over a larger scale.

Perhaps we would finally know if the recalcitrant teenager should shout to his parents, "I'm like that because you brought me up that way!" or whether he should say "I'm like that because of your genes!" While either way the parents are in the wrong, the similar answers have a fundamental difference. From such experiments we would discover how and whether genes define intelligence, skills and even artistic and literary talent. As a result, we would be able to see if one's success in life is simply the luck of the draw or if there is any truth behind the adage "Practice makes perfect."
But although the tantalising prospect of obtaining such truths is there, actual human cloning brings with it more problems and implications that we must consider. Countries all over the world have fought for freedom. Would a cloned human being be free? Decisions would have to be made as to whether the cloning laboratory owns him or bears responsibility towards him as a parent does to his child. Socially, who would take care of these people if the scientific community refuses to? The parent to "child" ratio would be alarmingly disproportionate, posing all manner of social problems.

In a worst-case scenario, people would own cloned beings who have no rights, a return to the despotic slavery of yesteryears. At present, unscrupulous businessmen care little enough about child labour and working conditions of labourers. Are we ready to take on new issues such as human cloning without having morality and principles lose out to commercial interests? I do not think so.

Another important implication and possibly the most frightening while also welcomed, is that cloning may reveal what makes us human. Do we truly have an immaterial "self" that we so often say is in the mind? Cloning can offer the answer to these questions simply by altering the cloning process and observing when a human is created without self-identity. While this is a question that awakens an insatiable curiosity, the prospect itself is chilling in the extreme.

Toying with other humans is already an issue in itself. To tinker with a person is to see how and when his self-identity is created is tantamount to lobotomy, but on a much larger scale. Even more depressing is the very prospect of actually knowing the answer to the question "What makes us human and different from other species?" Many people live in a state where they have never considered such a question. Such a great leap in self-awareness and perception is fearful to contemplate and perhaps only for the brave.

Continued research into cloning has many positive benefits in agricultural areas and conservation as well as biotechnology, but the greater interest and implications are in the area of human cloning. Here we meet with interesting and quizzical questions such as "If every cell of mine can be a person, is any injury akin to murder?" and how names affect a person's life, "What if I wasn't named after my great-grandfather?"

However, the importance of such conundrums and inane questions wane in comparison to the moral and ethical questions that human cloning raises about what makes us human and how much we actually value human life. Continued research into cloning not only raises such questions about what we believe but it has also heightened our sense of self-awareness. All of a sudden, in considering the implications of continued research into cloning and in trying to decide if it should be done, we realise that as a society as well as individually, we are unsure of what we believe. The prospect of cloning has forced us to realise that we are uncertain of ourselves.

Perhaps that is the most important implication of continued research into cloning -- that we now have a greater self-awareness and perception of what we think.

Marks: Content = 24/30, Expression = 15/20, Total = 39/50 (A1).
An interesting essay, well expressed and sufficiently analytical. You are able to present points of varying importance and to order their significance as well. Good.