This blog post takes a deep look at how human cloning technology can affect an individual’s dignity and identity, as well as the values and structures of our society.
Human cloning is the creation of a human with the same genes by cloning a zygote, or a body cell, in the state of cell division after the fertilization of an egg and sperm and before the development of a fetus. In other words, it is a technology that creates another human being that is genetically identical to a human being. Human cloning was first introduced to the public in 1996 in the UK with the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep. Dolly was the first mammal to be created through somatic cell cloning, sparking ethical and social discussions about the possibility of human cloning. This led to the question, “If humans could be cloned, what kind of social changes would we experience?” Let’s apply this technology to ourselves. If there was a human with the same appearance, voice, speech, fingerprints, and blood type as me (although it may vary depending on the environment, let’s assume that they are similar), what would I think? We would first feel an instinctive rejection. I will try to explain why we feel repulsion towards human cloning.
First, why do we feel repulsion towards human cloning? We would generally answer, “Because our dignity has been violated!” Then what is our dignity? In order to find the reason for our repulsion, we need to clarify what our dignity is. First, let’s look at the meaning of dignity. The encyclopedia defines human dignity as “a person’s inherent worth and right to be treated with respect and dignity.” This means that “humans are dignified, so no one can kill them or treat them harshly, and no matter how expensive something is, it cannot be compared to a human being.” This dignity is revealed in the idea that human life is more valuable than anything else. This dignity goes beyond simply protecting human life and emphasizes that all human beings have inherent dignity and value and should be treated equally. This dignity is an important concept for protecting individual human rights and maintaining the foundation of society. Even laws that are closely related to real life mention dignity. Article 10 of the Constitution states that “All citizens have dignity and value as human beings.” Human rights also originate from human dignity. However, there is no explanation in these statements as to why humans are dignified. Let’s discuss why humans are dignified.
Why are humans dignified? I concluded that humans should be dignified above all else. Without dignity, it would have been difficult for us to achieve mutual respect and cooperation in the process of human development. Human society is maintained by moral principles that require us to respect and protect each other even in the midst of competition and conflict. If a soldier is injured in a war and is left untreated, who would go to war and who would protect the society? Also, if we kill or hurt someone we don’t like in our daily lives, we would have to live in a society where we are anxious about when we might die, just like in the primitive state. Society is a group of people who have come together to survive, so in order to avoid an unstable and chaotic environment, humans have been given the attribute of dignity and the obligation to treat each other with dignity. The reason why humans are dignified is not because they have dignified attributes, but because they must be treated as dignified beings for their own survival and the maintenance of society.
Of course, one can argue based on indirect circumstances. For example, in the case of rescuing a drowning person, more people die and additional social resources are used. In the reality of Korea, there are cases where divers risk their lives to find children and use a lot of tax money to salvage the sunken Sewol ferry in a disaster like the Sewol ferry disaster. This may not be beneficial to society or the diver personally. However, the thought of what I would have done if I had been in that situation and the “moral obligation” to help someone in danger or difficulty, along with the understanding and empathy that that person could be me, make our society stronger and more stable. This “rightness” manifests itself in welfare that acts as a social safety net, and this welfare is the foundation for passing on a society that guarantees a more stable and humane life for our children, so that any human being in society has dignity indirectly benefits both society and its members. In conclusion, “legitimacy” is created by necessity, and our society has granted individuals this “legitimacy” through the tacit agreement of its members in the name of dignity. Our dignity can be defined as follows: “Dignity is a social consensus created by necessity.”
We feel that our dignity, which we have received in this way, is being undermined by human cloning. Specifically, what aspects of our dignity are being undermined? Human cloning treats humans like objects and can be used to create humans at any time. Cloning makes us look at the inherent value of humans from a instrumental perspective. When the creation of life becomes part of mechanical reproduction, its value and independence are undermined. In other words, we can create someone who can replace us exactly the same without us. This undermines the value of the individual and lowers the value of survival, even for the individual themselves. In addition, when members are treated like objects or parts, it is difficult to expect them to do more than their role in society. For a dynamic and progressive society, members must engage in creative and active activities beyond their role, but it is not easy to motivate individuals in an environment where there are always replicas of themselves, and they may not feel a sense of belonging to society and a sense of responsibility for their role.
Society has given individuals the attribute of dignity in order to protect its members and to maintain and develop itself. However, human cloning is a technology that can break this social consensus and endanger both society and its members, so we have an instinctive aversion to such technology.
