Flesh of My Flesh: The Ethics of Cloning Humans A Reader (Paperback)

~ Gregory E. Pence (Author)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Written by distinguished scientists, law professors, theologians, and philosophers, these 13 provocative essays on the legal, medical, and moral implications of human cloning present a balanced view of the issues. If you buy only one book on the ethics of human cloning, get this one.
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Product Description

The first book of its kind, Flesh of My Flesh is a collection of articles by today's most respected scientists, philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, and law professors about whether we should allow human cloning.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 176 pages
• Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.; 1 edition (July 25, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0847689824
• ISBN-13: 978-0847689828
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.8 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 9.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,259,311 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Good book for high school students, October 30, 1999

By A Customer

My son and I bought five anthologies on cloning for his science fair project,including the ones by McGee, Cole-Turner, and McCuen. If you want the ideas of all the world religions (pretty murky) get McGee's. Cole-Turner also has a lot, maybe too much, of religon. McCuen's just isn't very good. I liked FLESH OF MY FLESH because it has pieces in it by my sons hero, Stephen Jay Gould, and the conclusions from the National Bioethics Commission's Report (which condemned cloning). Pence's overview is also excellent. If you're just buying one book with lots of articles, and want the pro-science pieces and not the anti-religion ones, this is the one to go for.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Too many emotional arguments against, March 6, 2005

By	Charles Ashbacher "([e-mail])" (Marion, Iowa United States([e-mail])) - See all my reviews (TOP 50 REVIEWER)

When the world said "Hello Dolly" to the first mammal to be created via cloning, it suddenly became realistic to consider the possibility that humans could also be cloned. The announcement struck a very sensitive spot in the psyche of many people, and the Clinton administration moved quickly to appoint a commission to investigate the issues. The commission, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), after a very brief period of discussion, concluded that there should be a federal law banning the cloning of humans. This book is a collection of essays presenting several sides of the issue, although the majority is opposed to cloning.
The weakest arguments are the usual "slippery-slope" variety, where all possible reasons for cloning are rejected. Such arguments fail because humans are generally quite good at establishing limits, nothing really has to be just the first step in an unstoppable process. The most powerful arguments for research into human cloning are scientific ones. The increase in knowledge that would be accrued by conducting research into how a fertilized ovum develops and differentiates into a human would certainly lead to the alleviation of a lot of human suffering. Complete bans on all research in this area are difficult to justify.
There is a great deal of emotion in some of the essays in opposition to cloning. For example, on page 37 Leon Kass writes, "The prospect of human cloning, so repulsive to contemplate, is the occasion for deciding whether we shall remain free human beings who guide our technique toward the enhancement of human dignity." In a world of repressive governments, the majority of people struggling in brutal poverty, millions dying of easily treatable diseases, ethnic cleansing and warfare, to state that the cloning of humans is THE threat against human freedom and dignity is absurd.
My favorite essays were those who examined the possible advantages of human cloning with an open mind or presented their arguments in a scientific manner. Several contributors' point out that one of the most cited reasons people would have for cloning is unreasonable. It is thought that the sudden death of a child would lead the grieving parents to want to create an identical replacement via cloning. However, this simply would not occur. Identical twins have identical nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, are gestated in the same womb and in most cases grow up in the same environment. And yet, their behaviors as adults are quite different. There are even documented cases where one twin is gay and the other is not. The mathematical theory of chaos is based on the premise that, "small changes lead to large results." It is clear that human development is very chaotic, so any attempt to create a replacement is doomed to failure.
Another weak argument put forward in opposition to human cloning is that people created in this way would be considered inferior. In light of the longtime human struggle against racial, ethnic and political discrimination, a struggle that is finally beginning to be won, this point is nonsensical. People who are valued for what they are can and do overcome any detriment in their origins. The argument that cloning would lead to people with inherent defects is also a weak one. People with known genetic defects are allowed to exercise their rights to reproduce, even when the odds are great that any baby they create will have a serious or fatal deformity.
While this book presents many of the arguments against human cloning it also exposes some of the weaknesses in those arguments. The strongest argument against human cloning is that it will simply not work as the practitioners would hope. While I read the book with a great deal of interest, I would have preferred that the editor had included more essays by authors who argued rationally against cloning rather than emotionally.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Pretty good, but not great, March 20, 1999

By	[e-mail] (St. Louis) - See all my reviews

This book is a pretty nice collection of works concerning the ethical implications and questions surrounding cloning human beings. Some of the articles were less than convincing. However, most are well written, espcially the author's (Gregory Pence)article. All in all pretty good, but if you are going to read just one book on cloning, The Human Cloning Debate by Glenn McGee is better.