What are the ethical debates surrounding cloning organisms?
In his article, Eisenberg speaks a lot of the negative aspects of cloning organisms. This is useful in my research because it gives me a more well rounded view of this topic. By comparing Eisenberg’s thoughts to the thoughts of other professionals in this field, readers can make assumptions and opinions that are based off of many sources. Eisenberg is mainly concerned with maintaining genetic diversity in our world. This article is written clearly, citing many sources at the end. These attributes make the article seem more reliable.
Hansen’s article is one of the more unbiased, well rounded articles that I have cited. While other writers tend to focus on either the pros or the cons of cloning, Hansen covers both sides of the coin. In this article, both sides of the argument are covered with a strong sense of knowledge of the topic. Graphs, models, and other data points are provided, giving readers a sense of security in the articles fullness. In all, Hansen provides readers with a general sense of the attitudes that are held toward cloning in the United States and around the world. The way that Hansen writes is useful to my research specifically because it provides more than one side of the story in the case and very well sums up ideas held about cloning.
Ricki Lewis’ article is on of the more well rounded unbiased sources that I have cited. Lewis focuses on the overall ethics of cloning while also looking at the misconceptions about cloning. The argument that Lewis makes is one that somewhat leans subtly towards the side of cloning being an unethical thing, however, the article is not geared to try and persuade someone to believe that it is unethical. Lewis is merely exploring the questions and looking at possibilities. Lewis adds a useful perspective to my research that provides little bias and intriguing information.
In this article, David McCarthy does a fair job at presenting one side of the cloning arguments. Unlike what we see in Eisenberg’s argument, McCarthy offers ideas as to why cloning is beneficial to society and to science. The argument that McCarthy presents is almost that of a Pro Choice campaign. He argues that it is a legal issue as well as a moral one. Even though this article is clearly one that aims to persuade, it is still beneficial to my research because it allows me to have a full picture of the ideas behind one arguments views. Used alongside other articles, this article aids myself, and other readers, in creating our own perception of the topic at hand.
Christopher A. Pynes does a stand up job in this article writing about the bioethics of cloning. Pynes delves into the problems surrounding human as well as nonhuman cloning and replies to these problems. Unlike the above articles Pynes seems to really dive into this subject and he brings with him multiple references that creates an insightful source that is full of information. Pynes’ article is beneficial to my research because it explores many different aspects of human and nonhuman cloning while also looking at the many different arguments for and against human cloning. Pynes adds a very thought provoking piece to the argument that is beneficial not only for myself but for other researchers as well.