>>5003387 (OP)
>Is human cloning ethical?

Yes, I don't view it as any morally different from IVF.
Cloning a bunch of people though and treating them like a seperate caste of second-class citizens, or expecting them to be exactly like their parent/cell doner, would be very unethical though. Don't do that.

>>5003387 (OP)
I don't know. I was going to say it is yet another thing that undermines the process of evolution and survival of the fittest but that's so fucked up with modern medicine etc I have no idea what humans will look like in 5000 years if it keeps up. Probably crippled, diseased little monkeys dependent on life support to live.

They really should have combined eugenics with modern medicine - if you should likely be dead because of your medical condition, then you must give up the ability to reproduce in order to receive it.

Anyway that's the only issue I really have with cloning. More shit into the human genetic septic tank.

>>5003488
*to receive the treatment/cure

>>5003387 (OP)
>In the eyes of law, yes, I have violated- I have committed a great crime
>but in the eyes of god, I am amongst him
>I am a god myself in some ways

>>5003387 (OP)
Twins are natural clones, I don't see why would you want a clone/twin anyway.

Cloning is awesome, I once cloned some shit using a chainsaw.

>>5003387 (OP)
We could cure several diseases and improve human health across the board trivially but we don't because people who know absolutely fuck all about it get to vote about it.

>>5003742
Human cloning is one of the few things I actually think sits on a slope. The level of change it would bring will create man made horrors beyond our current comprehension (assuming the research hasn't already been done in a clandestine fashion anyway)

>>5003392
What if you clone a genetic super-caste and treat everyone else like shit?

>>5003761
This is just star trek

>>5003387 (OP)
no, but it's going to happen anyways.

>>5003392
IVF isn't ethical either.

>>5003828
>IVF isn't ethical either.
Why?

>>5003915
Nta but its about how eggs are selected. Depending on your view on abortion IVF can be an issue as fertilised eggs are terminated and on the non-abortion front it has caused a massive problem with female exploitation. The egg harvesting can border on organ harvesting levels of bad in places like south korea for instance

>>5003919
A fertilized egg is not a person. It's a cell.

To say otherwise is essentially saying the christian bible is fact. "Before you formed in the womb I knew you" is the sole basis for considering a blob of chemicals without any organs - especially not the organ that makes an individual human an individual human (the brain) - a "person".

Note, if you consider a fertilized an egg a person, you must consider women inherent murder machines because 1/5 to 1/3 fertilized eggs spontaneously abort in the womb. Therefore women are cursed and you must hate them.

>>5003925
Note the useage:
>"depending on your view"

I at no point said I believed that IVF was amoral.

>>5003938
Yeah sure, you don't want to offend anyone, but let's cut to the chase
"depending on your view" is saying values are somehow subjective, despite reality being objective. How can subjective values work if they are totally incongruent with objective reality? That's called delusion.

And reality has a funny way of punishing delusional people.
>money doesn't matter, i can always make more
>goes broke, dies because cant afford medical care
>fertilized eggs are people
>goes broke under the burden of 8 underfed retards, family sinks into permanent poverty

>>5003940
Look anon, I am not really here for a philosophy discussion on the extent of objectivism and the nature of how we observe reality and how it impacts the way we see the world (as tempting as that may be). I played devils advocate by explaining to >>5003915 why some people say stuff like this >>5003828

>>5003944
(and for what it's worth, found your original reply discussing harvesting and termination very informative)

>>5003948
No problem

>>5003505
Only identical twins, not fraternal ones

>>5003954
Can confirm. Knew two growing up with one blonde and one ginger. The blonde one has become a fairly ordinary working joe and the ginger one is now a gay furry in the reserves because he couldn't be a police officer

>>5003940
Due to the Is-Ought Paradox, there is no logical way to connect observable reality to ethical positions making the valuation of the objective phenomena still subjective, and the arguments against IVF typically come from deontological frameworks that materially sub-optimal consequence is outright inapplicable to. That you disagree with their priors does not make them delusional, because the positions ARE founded well in a worldview that gets significantly more consistent than your own on account of the centuries of very intelligent people thinking through the minutia of it.

There's a reason every attempt at a "scientific" state has gone horribly. And I say this as somebody who's brought up the unnoticeable miscarriage issue myself!

>>5003956
Thanks for confirming.

>>5003957
>Is/ought paradox
The is/ought paradox is not a fact because it depends on the bald faced lie that what is natural is not god. Hume really wants you to accept his personal god. He is not a philosohper. He is a priest. He is not a thinker. He is a dishonest theologian.

There is NO difference between is and ought. You live, or you die. Advantageous behavior is advantageous. Disadvantageous behavior is disadvantageous. There is no such thing as a naturalistic fallacy. The very idea was coined in defense of spirituality as a thought terminating cliche.
>but consistency...
Internal consistency is absolutely worthless as a value and a virtue. Consistent systems have consistently failed to be purely adaptive. China is a great example of why you should never be consistent. They have no consistency, no principles, and NO morals outside of "dominate.", and while they encounter some massive fuckups (like the 4 pests campaign and inadequate control during the one child era) they are on the fast track to complete and utter dominance, to the point where the han people are set to become the only human species left.

And you will go extinct thinking you are very right.

>>5003972
i like how china was all in on "dogs are fucking pests just eat them, man over all, it's in confucius' writing you western fag" and then as soon as they transition to living comfortably they're all in on "eating dogs is for psycho peasants who would sell their kids for meat, ban this filth, they are clearly friends use your feelings monkey"

0 consistency is the path to success

>>5003957
the only failed scientific states are those that failed to completely abandon spirituality.

>>5003972
>There is NO difference between is and ought. You live, or you die.
But how do you logically PROVE this? The paradox is that there is a gap between "what is" and "what ought to be", so you cannot logically derive your consequentialist ethics from the material measures of productivity it takes as input. Neither you nor the deontologists can prove yourselves or disproof the other.

And given that pretty much every society that has approached pure results=good has devolved into a self-destructive rat-race, there is clearly some more advanced element of decision-making demanding concerns beyond this to sustain productivity, with my awareness of the subject pointing to something behind the Is-Ought Paradox.

>China is a great example of why you should never be consistent.
The country with something insane like a quarter of its industry under a sword of Damocles their absolutely omnipresent corruption forged in the form of a fuck-off huge dam over a hundred people have been convicted for compromising the construction of? With absolutely constant tainting of the food and water supply because inspections are a joke? Infamous for a wide array of fuckery to put on the appearance of things going well in the middle of horrible disasters?

Comes across as quite the body of evidence for why internal consistency IS important to me, because clearly self-reinforcing and widely-internalized bodies of reasoning are how you get this thing called "quality control" to stick. Adaptability comes from working out what actually needs such consistency and stability to limit scope to that so things that don't need it can adjust as needed.

>>5003978
As every single attempt to date at banning spirituality went horribly, it appears there is an as yet undiscovered demand only spirituality fulfills.

>>5004026
>You have to logically prove it
Fuck your "god" of logic. You live or you die. Want to test it out?

Consequentialism and nature beats virtue every time. A virtuous person must eventually perform a disadvantageous action to uphold their virtue. At this point, you are destroyed by superior people.

>>5004026
At no point has logic and goodness actually mattered. At no point has virtue mattered. The priesthood/royalty has ALWAYS tweaked and annulled it to taste.

These are systems of control. Peasants follow them. Their real gods flaunt them. It sounds edgy and socially unacceptable to say this but only because a peasant is expected to mature into a follower of the faith, and obey their superiors virtue and its modifications as their superiors see fit.

He is 100% on point, for the society, the state. Morals are not real. Principles are chains meant to bind animals. Cattle, if thou wiltstd. That is what the arbiters of logical goodness have always called its followers. Virtue is moo.

>>5004047
At least someone gets it

The idea that good must follow logic is a law... and logic based on what? That is also prescribed. The values upon which proving morality logically rest are as arbitrary as pure decisive action itself, especially in any bullshit system where "ethics" should even be a word and people will gladly condemn the will to live as arbitrary. It all stinks so heavily of an old cult, a virtue ethics cult, because it is in fact derived from it as a means of control, which the controllers do not truly believe in. One day they wake up and decide to totally change some basic tenet of moral thought, because only the common people could ever believe it.

America's "god given rights" are a great example of this form of management. God given where in what faith? Logically if you assume ____? Nowhere real. Moving target.

>>5004026
>With absolutely constant tainting of the food and water supply because inspections are a joke?
Inspections are only stringent enough to maintain the pace of progress. As china progresses, the impact of simply doing the work is reduced, and the impact of doing the work well is improved. This is similar to their approach to the treatment of animals. When the majority must be cruel to animals to survive, to enforce the idea that kindness is a virtue is anti-chinese. it punishes the chinese people to protect nothing and impedes progress. When the majority live comfortable and modern lives, cruelty to animals no longer confers a survival advantage. It is now more prudent to punish cruelty, should it spread and contaminate the comfortable modern life.
>But they lie! To their own people!!!
To their benefit. Panic is pain.
>working out what actually needs such consistency
And among the things that do not need consistency are good and evil, virtue and sin.

China's progress and america's collapse as it descended into liberalism and virtue faggotry are... telling.

>>5003387 (OP)
man who even cares i just want some crazy billionaire to stop raping kids and go full dr moreau instead and make cat men and lizard people and have them fight battles in tunnels is that too much to ask.

>>5003742
> clone yourself and sell your copy to be used for experiments….
Dang would that be an easy way to get rich?

>>5004257
because thats not really possible, in your lifetime at least

>>5004046
>Fuck your "god" of logic. You live or you die. Want to test it out?
Given that this is extremely closely related to the epistemological questioning that gave birth to the scientific method upon which multiple explosions in life expectancy and carrying capacity relied, it seems such questions were very important to ask for a lot more people to live

>Consequentialism and nature beats virtue every time.
No, in actual history the virtuous tend to win out because the intentional consequentialists face-plant into externalities due to unknown unknowns, especially those induced by fellow consequentialists lying to them for a better personal position

>A virtuous person must eventually perform a disadvantageous action to uphold their virtue.
But in adhering to their virtues, they can align far more actors to have more advantageous actions done overall

>>5004047
>At no point has logic and goodness actually mattered. At no point has virtue mattered.
Of course it has, a cheating asshole who spews nonsense is frequently binned by wider society

>The priesthood/royalty has ALWAYS tweaked and annulled it to taste.
But the constraints of what wider society will let them get away with creates persistence in behavior patterns. This is important to establish long-term expectations for time-intensive prerequisites to productivity

>These are systems of control. Peasants follow them. Their real gods flaunt them.
Those you call "real gods" themselves must rely on adherence to predict eachother's behavior for long-term collaboration. When they don't, the power structure fractures quickly as the elites scrap it for personal benefit.

>>5004051
>Inspections are only stringent enough to maintain the pace of progress.
I wouldn't call crushing the margins of the truck drivers to the point they can't afford to clean their tanks of toxic industrial chemicals on a cooking oil delivery "progress". This arose from rapid and continuing DEGREDATION of standards as the personal benefit for the inspectors defecting from enforcing the law increased due to private enterprise concentrating wealth, with the primary food supply being so fucked that the CCP has to maintain an entirely separate one to keep its elites from being poisoned

>As china progresses, the impact of simply doing the work is reduced, and the impact of doing the work well is improved.
This does not remove the heavy metals from the ground water. The costs of fixing that rather considerably outweigh the costs saved by doing it in the first place.

>It is now more prudent to punish cruelty, should it spread and contaminate the comfortable modern life.
This matter of barring cruelty that "doesn't matter" to sensitize people to cruelty that does is EXACTLY the game theory that has edgy midwits like you consistently fuck up every time they have gotten power, because you don't care to learn the principles of decision-making and so have no chance of understanding the work these abstractions amortize.

>To their benefit. Panic is pain.
It is not merely the CCP lying to the people. It is every step of entire industries systematically lying to everyone they can to scrap the maximum personal gain at enormous expense to the final result. The layers of bribed inspectors, sub-standard materials, incorrect construction procedure, and more are an active hazard to enormous swaths of the population.

And your constructions already re-invent major elements of virtue ethics from THE SAME PRINCIPLES. People in the fucking Bronze Age openly discussed the merits of raw results versus consistency of principle and those that won MILLENNIA of history favored the latter.

>>5003972
>to the point where the han people are set to become the only human species left.
incredibly grim prospect

>>5003387 (OP)
What race is the clone?

In theory yes, in practice there's no way it wouldn't be used for wild purposes. Mass produced anencephalic clones for organ/tissue harvesting purposes would be the "good" ending.

>>5003387 (OP)
Doesn't matter/don't care.

>muh g-d
>muh morals!
well memed, unwilling egoists!

>>5005096
shalom!

>>5003761
>What if you clone a genetic super-caste and treat everyone else like shit?

Yes, that would be immoral, and mean.

>>5003828
>IVF isn't ethical either.

IVF is ethical.

>>5005091
>In theory yes, in practice there's no way it wouldn't be used for wild purposes. Mass produced anencephalic clones for organ/tissue harvesting purposes would be the "good" ending.

If you have the equipment to make clones to scale, you have the equipment to 3d print or otherwise just cultivate the individual organs you want. This is a reality that only exists in the minds of people who think inventions are isolated from the context that makes them. Nobody is going to clone an entire body when you can just print off skin or mass-produce fabricated organs.
Granted, cloning a race of stupid, artificially-matured, people as organic drones *would* be a solution to labor. That could happen. Making a humanoid robot is actually really, really, difficult, and organic systems are alarmingly cheap once you've figured out the manufacturing processes.

>>5003387 (OP)
Yes only if they find a solution for telomeres and telomere regeneration as any cloned animal miss a portion of it de ending on the age of original organism
There is a reason why clones like dolly died young
Bascially cloned humans without fixing telemores is like deliberate pic related
Which is super cruel

>>5005882
clones are made to work out in the library??
wtf

In the modern world there are no incentives to having kids and no evolutionary pressures, so eventually the human population would have to be artificially sustained.
However clones would lower the genetic diversity and make it difficult to avoid inbreeding in the future, so it should be avoided. Instead women should be offered wages for carrying IVF babies from the fittest donors.