Utilitarian Consequentialist Viewpoint in Human Cloning

utile Consequentialist stand in mankind CloningIntroductionHuman clone has been a contentious subject marked with heated debate. However, some good deal seem to incline to the position that military personnel clone at the turn over time is unethical for a number of reasons including the likelihood of harm to participants and the sanctuary of techniques used. An action is considered ethical if it portrays a commitment to honor other. This is the counselling of the useful consequentialist position, to maximize others overall good, as well as, the good of ones self. From a functional consequentialist viewpoint, charitable re-create is considered unethical. This paper is an evaluation of the utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint concerning the anaesthetize of human copy.Human CloningTo those in favor of human clone, their arguments a great deal revolve around the idea of addressing reproduction however, such arguments tend to focus on the narrow benefits involved (Caplan, 2014). This does not mean that such arguments privation merit some arguments in favor of human cloning in some way uphold the most meaningful and deepest shared societal values. In anticipation of human cloning, proponents pass raised practical benefits including avoiding the luck of genetical diseases, allow couples of the same sex to have children, a resolve to infertility, replace lost children or spouses and replication of talent. On the other hand, opponents have their own reasons revolving on the ethics of the technological application. For example, violation of the convention moralistic norms experimenting on humans, potential harm on cloned individuals and the effect of the technology on the relationship between generations (Devolder, 2013). However, both sides concur on the need to criticism on the social and ethical implication of human cloning.Utilitarian Consequentialist Viewpoint and EvaluationUtilitarian consequentialism is founded on the idea that an action is evaluated in price of pleasure and inconvenience in causes utilitarianism attempt to weigh the two options in arriving at a moral decision that yields the least disturb and most happiness. Concerning the issue of human cloning, a utilitarian consequentialist would weigh the pleasure and pain produced by the technology (Petrillo, 2014). nevertheless, it does not mean that because human cloning whitethorn result in overall happiness for a greater majority, it is ethically accepted. It is true that human cloning has a number of potential arbitrary benefits as mention earlier however, it also has its own negative aspect. From a utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint, after weighing the perceived pleasure and potential pains, human cloning should not be permitted as it would result in more than pain to the cloned individuals and the society since the clones will exist as copies or unpatterned part of the existing humans.The utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint in human cloning h olds some water and is arguable to be valid because allowing human cloning will be like setting the foundation for capacities that can shift humans at the genetic level. It is evident from previous human actions that actions of this genius have had a significant effect on the human genetic pool (Kuhse, Schuklenk Singer, 2015). For example, the treatment of diabetes using insulin has prolonged the lives of individuals with diabetes that would have died before reproducing and hence has contributed to an increase in diabetes gene in the population genetic pool. action in human cloning without polishing on the potentially serious and unanticipated consequence would be a great mistake in the human history. Given the importance of what is a stake, the scientist should be modest in attempting to extrapolate human procreation and life, particularly when there is no compelling reason. aboard the many potential negative consequences to the society and the cloned individuals, this just ifies utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint in human cloning.ConclusionThough it may not be possible to know the long-term consequences of human cloning, the utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint holds that human cloning should not be permitted as it would result in more pain to cloned individuals and the society. The proponents and opponents of human cloning seem to concur on the need to reflect on the social and ethical implication of human cloning, thus pointing to the vindication of the utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint in human cloning.ReferencesCaplan, A. (2014). Raymond Waggoner Lectures-Arthur Caplan, What is Wrong With Human Cloning? The Ethics of Technological Reproduction, 1998.Devolder, K. (2013). Were it physically safe, reproductive human cloning would be acceptableKuhse, H., Schuklenk, U., Singer, P. (2015). Bioethics an anthology(Vol. 40). John Wiley Sons.Petrillo, S. (2014). Moral Theories and Cloning in Kazuo Ishiguros Never Let Me Go. Berkeley Undergradu ate Journal, 27(1).