Shelly Kagan believes it is not the hard facts of cloning that cause controversy, but the emotions.

‘I don’t think cloning is a very deep issue from a philosophical point of view,’ said Kagan, a professor of moral philosophy at Yale University. ‘Emotionally, it’s something that people are very worked up about.’

Kagan spoke Wednesday morning in Grant Auditorium on the ethics of cloning to a group of philosophy students and those interested in the controversial topic.

Kagan discussed the issue of cloning within a modern context, instead of the religious or science-fiction notions that he said frequently surround the issue. He offered arguments supporting both reproductive and research cloning.

Reproductive cloning involves creating a genetic copy that is allowed to fully develop, such as 1996’s Dolly the sheep. In research cloning, the goal is not to create a cloned being, but to use the clone cells for research purposes.

During his discussion, Kagan broke the issue down, describing the science behind it before elaborating on its potential benefits. He addressed the many misconceptions that accompany the topic of cloning, saying a clone is not the same person as its parent, but is more like a twin. While both the parent and the clone are nearly genetically identical, each develops in its own unique environment, resulting in completely different characters.

‘One obvious concern is that this person wouldn’t be unique, but that’s a misunderstanding of science,’ Kagan said. ‘They would be full-blown human beings just like us.’

Ben Bradley, a Syracuse University philosophy professor, arranged for Kagan to speak.

‘He’s a well-known moral philosopher, he’s a lively speaker, and he would be of interest to both the philosophy department and the university community at large,’ Bradley said.

Kagan came as a part of the new integrated learning major in ethics, Bradley said. The integrated major concerns the philosophical study of ethics, but involves other fields of study, including theory and history, according to the program’s website. Most of the audience members were part of Bradley’s PHI 192: ‘Introduction to Moral Theory’ class.

After his discussion, Kagan answered students’ questions, and some audience members challenged various facets of his argument. Questions addressed topics ranging from the use of cloned body parts to issues surrounding the health of the cloned beings.

‘The way to make progress on this is to actually talk to people,’ Kagan said. ‘Moral philosophers don’t often get called upon to comment in a public or even semi-public venue about issues that have a moral dimension.’

One audience member asked Kagan if it was ethical to create cloned human beings just for body parts. Kagan answered by pointing out that millions of people donate their blood each year with no ethical dilemma.

Cynthia Njuguna, a freshman international relations major, asked Kagan about the moral dilemma of creating more humans through cloning in an age of overpopulation. He acknowledged there were complexities that accompany this issue from a political standpoint. He pointed out many forms of creation today differ from traditional forms, such as in vitro fertilization.

‘A lot of times we hear arguments for why it’s bad, and I think it’s probably good for everyone to hear the other side, especially from someone who’s not a scientist,’ said Holly Stone, a freshman bioengineering and biochemistry major.

Stone’s majors have made her familiar with the negative connotations usually associated with cloning, she said. She said she thinks confusion might scare people away from the issue of cloning.

‘People don’t understand all the ins and outs with the genetics,’ Stone said, ‘and that’s what scares them.’

mjfahner@syr.edu

Published on October 27, 2010 at 12:00 pm