Analysis Of Kass's Repugnance Argument

Improved Essays
Repugnance is the extreme feeling of distaste or repulsion. But does repugnance mean something it is morally wrong? Leon R. Kass would argue that it does; especially when it comes to human cloning. I agree with Kass, there is something seriously disturbing about human cloning and it should not be practiced or made legal. Although I agree with his stance on the matter, I think his arguments are weak. In my opinion, Kass’ repugnance argument is his weakest argument. Some of his other weaker arguments are that human clones would have a distorted identity and individuality. Also, that parents of clones would dehumanize their cloned child. Kass does have some stronger arguments. For example, human cloning is manufacturing children. I also agree …show more content…
I believe this is when his arguments could have become stronger. But they don’t. I agree that it does feel like manufacturing children but Kass argues this will lead to dehumanizing the cloned child and parents will have false expectations of what the clone will be like. He makes another big mistake by relating cloning to invitro fertilization or IVF. In my opinion this is a mistake because these days invitro fertilization is accepted by almost everyone and has helped millions of people become parents. When he relates human cloning and invitro fertilization I think he loses a lot of people who might agree with him because they do agree with IVF. Also, in my opinion these are two very different things. IVF is simply fertilizing an egg with a sperm outside of the body, using two sets of genetic information to create a child. Cloning is using one set of genetic material and forcing it to divide. It is not fertilization at all. I believe this would have been a better argument for Kass to use. It also backs up my first argument against repugnance. Many people were repulsed by the thought of IVF, and most have come around to the …show more content…
You can put rules and regulations around cloning but you cannot stop this from getting into the wrong hands and someone using it for terrifying purposes. Kass is right, cloning should be banned in humans. I myself still had a hard time figuring out why I thought cloning was wrong after reading Kass’ arguments. Kass should have stuck with creating a stronger argument against the technological, liberal and meliorist views. I agree that there is definitely some repugnance to the idea of human cloning but Kass should not have argued that the repugnance we feel for human cloning is a reflection of a violation on nature and moral. There are many other arguments to be made here. Kass should have spent more time on the slippery slope argument or the fact that this is narcissistic and unnecessary. There are too many possibilities for abuse and far too many unknowns. Saying that cloning will result in identity and individuality issues or the dehumanizing of children is simply not a strong enough argument. There is no denying that there is something extremely narcissistic and arrogant about wanting to clone yourself. In my opinion it is even stranger to want to clone someone else, no matter what the reason is. I say we stick to creation where human beings come together, male DNA and female DNA. Human cloning needs to remain

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    As much as debunkers claim that evolution is not a Good Reason to believe in moral positions, it is also not a Good Reason to disbelieve them either. Who is to say that true moral beliefs are not what is most fit? Would it not make sense for objective morality to have characteristics that would aid in the survival of a community? Sure, evolution is bound to get off track a little bit, but here we must focus on degrees of reason. We must assume our beliefs are innocent until proven guilty by Good Reason, and that most of our beliefs are probably close enough to the truth, otherwise they would not have aided in the survival and been selected for by evolution.…

    • 766 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I stand on the line of it won’t work and even if it does it shouldn’t be allowed. It’s basically stealing one 's identity. Most importantly, it defies nature preventing the genetic differences that occur within a species to take place allowing it to survive. In many cases like the one from the article “The Cloning Controversy” “Opponents called for a ban on human cloning research, arguing that cloning offers few benefits to science while requiring unacceptable risks and undermining our very concept of humanness.” Readers can clearly take away that our humanness comes from our natural births and our individuality. Who are we to take away that right to our uniqueness?…

    • 1745 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If we cloned humans, a whole new set of laws would need to be created just to identify their rights and whether they are property or their own person. If everyone had two or three clones walking around, it would be hard to tell people from their clones, and the entire world would plunge into confusion. In conclusion, the disadvantages of cloning outweigh the benefits. Even though cloning can be useful by providing children to families, subjects for experimentation, and extra body parts, it is generally considered unethical to clone and to play God. If we cloned humans, they would very likely have genetic defects…

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Yes, having a child through cloning, surrogacy or invitro is a different form of reproduction, but that does not mean that it is wrong. Plus, these non-traditional methods of reproduction allow couples or women to have the biological children they may not be able to have naturally (2) The belief that a cloned child would not have their own individuality. The fact that Kass, who I would guess to be educated believes this, shows in my opinion his ignorance and bias on the subject. I will be open minded enough to give him the benefit of having a lack of knowledge because his paper was written in 1997 and there have been a number of changes in the scientific community that he would not have been aware of. The thing is just because two people share the same genetic coding does not mean that the DNA coding both people manifest in the same way.…

    • 2288 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    PGD can have some negative impacts on society if the process is used too frequently or for what I consider the wrong reasons. I believe that sometimes the use of PGD is unnecessary especially for gender selection which is available in some countries for example the United States, but thankfully it is illegal in New Zealand. In my opinion discarding other perfectly good embryos just so you can get the gender you want to ‘complete’ your family like what Nicola Trathen did is unethical. I also believe that using PGD for non-threatening disorders that don’t involve a shorten life-span is unnecessary for example Down-Syndrome. As Rebecca E. Kopp has addressed people who have down-syndrome are capable of having a rewarding and meaningful life.…

    • 1654 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He does not argue that torture should be used casually, rather his argument stems from the premise that nations should not be so quick to ban torture in every single circumstance. His primary rhetorical strategy is to use hypothetical extremes to prove his point, in addition, he also appeals to emotion to evoke a sense towards Utilitarianism to justify torture in certain cases. His primary downfall in his argument was that many of his hypothetical have yet to be seen in real life, in light of this, it may delegitimize his argument in certain people’s…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some feel that the cloning of embryos, is morally repugnant and may feel that the idea of cloning humans is “playing God” according to “What are the Pros and Cons of Cloning?” So, if too many people are conflicted based on a moral stance, it will create too much turmoil in the science community. Considering how difficult it is to create clones, scientist cannot afford to get their clones rejected solely based on morale. Others also fear that people could decide to genetically engineer super kids, according to “What are the Pros and…

    • 486 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Is Human Cloning Possible

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Instead of creating clones that have to experience the effects of the imperfections, scientists should focus more on improving the lives of people by using other ways that does not include ethics or does not cause harm to others. These scientists are making the clones suffer through unneeded complications. Head states in the article, “Should human cloning be banned?”, “Scientists generally agree that it would be irresponsible to clone a human being until cloning has been perfected, given that the cloned human would probably face serious, and ultimately terminal, health issues.” It is impetuous for scientists to continue cloning because the babies that were made are alive and have their own feelings. They should not be forced to live with health issues their entire life because of our imperfect experiments. Scientists only want to create clones in order to have better organ donors.…

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Warren starts by refuting the main argument which argues that it is wrong to kill fetuses, she says that the argument uses two different definitions of the term “human” which makes the argument invalid. Warren does a good job describing each definition and showing when the argument uses each definition of the term “human”. Later on in the article Warren attempts to define the traits of personhood, she uses the traits to help prove that fetuses are not a person which means they have no rights, but she mistakenly states that her definition of personhood is not a complete concept of personhood. This mistake allows people to refute her argument because if this is not the full definition of personhood then Warren might be leaving out part of the definition that might give fetuses rights. To make it even worse Warren explains that an entity does not need all the traits to be classified as a person, so if there are traits that are left out of the definition of personhood and if any of those traits describe a fetus, then makes it even easier to refute Warren’s argument.…

    • 1931 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Vaccines: Article Analysis

    • 1319 Words
    • 5 Pages

    It is also unethical to let a human die in a trial of a new drug, but they are not comparable because one was intentional and the other accidental. The author is trying to use ethos and pathos to make you question the motives and the testing of vaccines. Perkins is also trying to make readers feel sympathy for those who suffer from vaccination testing, and use that sympathy to arise anger towards corporations. The…

    • 1319 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays