Surname 1

Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
Ethics of Human Cloning
Introduction
Human cloning has been a controversial subject for a long time. Proponents of the technology
may assert that obligation to individual liberty, as postulated by J.S. Mill, calls for individual
freedom in making choices such as human cloning. However, the use of this technology should
not cause significant harm to other people. On the other hand, critics believe that liberty is a very
broad term to form an uncontroversial moral right. Human cloning presents various moral rights
conflicts and serious harm that need to be addressed. This paper reviews thisThe moral and
ethical dilemma of. This paper tries to analyze the human cloning can be analyzed through the
lenses of various ethical theories. The theories which include utilitarian, relativist, natural law
ethics, Kantian, Egoism and virtue ethics.
One fundamental question that the paper tries to answer is if human cloning is morally
acceptable. The paper will fFirstly, identify the moral dilemma should be identified in the case
study, and then analyze the case will be analyzed using each theory. The case study presents
various moral and ethical dilemmas of human cloning. If a person is consequentiality, i.e. the
consequences of an action determine if the action is morally right or wrong, then recognition of
human cloning may be reasonably easy. In the present case study, proponents of cloning could
argue that cloning a child from the cells of Allan, who is terminally ill, could help the parents
have another child. The argument will effectively concentrate on minimizing the plight of the
terminally ill patients thus creating a feeling of happiness for the majority of people. However,
opponents of human cloning argue that it undermines human dignity.
The Utilitarian Ethics
The theory posits that the right action is that which yields the greatest sense of happiness for the
greatest number of people. In this case, the morality of any act cannot be separated from its

Surname 2
consequences. Critics of the Act-utilitarianism argue that the theory is at odds with individual
rights that must not be diminished just because a person expects good outcomes. However,
contemporary utilitarians have amended the previous theory forming a new one called RuleUtilitarianism. Rule-Utilitarianism establishes basic rules that judge the actions of people as right
or wrong. Utilitarianism would lend support to human cloning because the technology would
appeal to many peoples shared values of benevolence and sympathy. The popular argument will
favor human cloning because society will reap maximum benefits. In the case study, the parents
would live happier lives by getting another son. Therefore, the theory advances the lifesaving
aspect of human cloning that creates a feeling of happiness not only for parents but also for other
members of the society (Lecture Notes; MacKinnon and Fiala 95-102).
Ethical Relativism
Ethical relativism holds that there exists no universal ethics of right and wrong since morality is
dependent on the subjective nature of human beings. Within this theory, cultural relativism holds
that human beings are products of society and culture. The differences between societies and
cultures shape peoples moral beliefs and practices. As such, the theory challenges a persons
conviction in the universality and objectivity of moral truth. Another category of ethical
relativism is ethical subjectivism. The theory holds that there lacks an objective way of
ascertaining right and wrong hence human beings only express personal feelings and attitudes. In
general, ethical relativism is hinged upon flexibility in making choices and personal autonomy.
Based on the arguments by ethical relativists, one can state with certainty that they support
human cloning because it is a personal expression of the aspiration to have augmented life
options. Therefore, society should block any unpredictable moral judgements from stopping
individuals from using human cloning for betterment and pursuit of happiness (Lecture notes;
MacKinnon and Fiala 46-55).
Ethical Egoism

Surname 3
Ethical Egoism proclaims that human beings have a duty to do that, which is of the best interest
to the self. In this case, self-interest supersedes the needs and interests of other people. To
egoists, even those acts of altruism are merely motivated by ones self-interest. Human cloning
will be openly accepted by egoists because of the need to push the limits of the technology.
Ethical egoism is influential in Victor suggesting that they clone Alan in order retain his unique
genetic gifts and honor his memory. To egoists, human cloning presents is mostly self-serving. In
the case study, Victor who shows egoistic tendencies thinks that since Alan is terminally ill and
has no right to choose, then Victor has the right to do that for him in order to pursue his selfinterest. When acting in concert with relativism and utilitarianism, ethical egoism promotes
human cloning by placing self-interest first and the common good last (Lecture notes;
MacKinnon and Fiala 72-74).
Virtue Ethics
Virtue ethics proclaims a virtuous person must do what is good or right. A virtuous person acts
virtuously in exercising virtues such as generosity, honesty, care, courage, kindness and,
patience. Two compelling issues that ought to be emphasized when dealing with the application
of virtue ethics in human cloning are the status of the DNA donor and the right of the clone. If
the argument of human cloning is based on the moral right of the DNA donor (Alan in our case)
versus that of the clone, then virtue ethics does not offer much support to the analysis. The clone,
according to virtue ethics, is not important to the debate about rightness or wrongness of the
process of human cloning. In exercising a given right, such as cloning in our case study, one can
act or not act in accordance with virtue ethics. Because human cloning leads to creation of a life
form as opposed to elimination of one, a virtue theorist would argue that it leads to human
flourishing. In our case study, since the parents want to clone a terminally ill child to produce
the exact copy, the process is inconsistent with virtue ethics. Therefore, if the actions of the

Surname 4
individuals that seek cloning are virtuous, then human cloning is well within the limits of moral
permissibility because the theory does not concern itself with the moral status of the process or
outcome (Lecture notes; MacKinnon and Fiala 150-155).
Deontology (Kantianism)
The goodness of an act or its moral worth depends on its condition i.e. duty is superior to
character and consequences of an action. Kants categorical imperative informs the argument on
human cloning because it is based on morality. According to this theory, for anything to have a
moral status then it must be a moral agent. A categorical imperative is a moral obligation, which
is unanimously compelling and binding. It is the duty of human beings to act upon the moral
obligation. In using people as means to an end, the theory supports human cloning. In our present
case, the new clone could give the parents the same happiness that Alan did since it will have the
same physical and emotional characteristics enhanced by genetic transfer. Another imperative of
the Kantian theory is autonomy. The morally permissibility of human cloning suggests that
clones, just like human beings can be moral agents thus autonomous (Lecture notes; MacKinnon
and Fiala 113-120).
Natural Law Ethics
The final theory of natural law ethics postulates that an action can be natural (good) or unnatural
(bad). The theory assesses actions based on their inherent value. One proponent of natural law
ethics is St. Thomas Aquinas. He hypothesized that natural law is defined by the way humans
take part in the external law. The external law is the law of God that is objectively and naturally
good. In applying natural law ethics to human cloning, one can argue that clones cannot be
considered human in their entirety. Based on Aquinas arguments, clones are only human at the
gene/chromosomal level. If clones are regarded as humans, then society ought to guarantee them
the same natural rights that human beings enjoy. Since the expected clone in our case study will
be identical to Alan, then one can argue that it will be an agent of moral good. However, if

Surname 5
Natural law theory postulates that clones are not human, then they are not moral agents. In this
case, human cloning will be morally impermissible (Lecture notes; MacKinnon and Fiala 135142).
Conclusion
In applying moral theories Kantian, virtue ethics, Utilitarianism, natural law, ethical
relativism and ethical egoism to the case study of human cloning, it is apparent that whether
the action is morally permissible is hinged on the moral theory used. Most of the ethical theories
support human cloning because the clones are also moral agents. When examining the case
study, cloning might give the parents of Alan a new lease of life as they will have a sense of
happiness. For this reason, this paper concludes that human cloning for purposes of creating a
new human being to replace a terminally ill patient might be morally permissible.

Surname 6
Works Cited
Lecture Notes (Study Guides). 2015.
MacKinnon, Barbara, and Andrew Fiala. Ethics: Theory and Ccontemporary Iissues. Cengage
Learning, 2014. Print.

Surname 7
Dear Joan,
Thank you very much for providing such a professional paper.
While checking the essay, I have noticed several mistakes:
- Firstly, please remember that the first-level heading should be bolded, flush left and title
-

case.
Secondly, please check the subject-verb disagreements.
Thirdly, please check my comments regarding the thesis statement. Also, this link will be

useful.
Your grade for the paper is College A (68).
The bid share for the order is 90%.
Best regards,
Linda