sakrilege

So, I've seen references to fundamentalist xians claiming that clones will not have souls. Suspending the fact that I don't believe in souls, I find this unnerving. Comments from theists will be greatly appreciated.

Perchance

I'm not a theist. Hope that's okay .

It would depend on what the theist called "a soul." (Maybe cloning could finally get them to answer this question, which as far as I'm concerned most of them dodge). If it was personality, or a mind, then a mindless clone that did no more than, robotically, what it was told could be called soulless.

Otherwise, though, I really wouldn't know what it meant. One could argue that the soul is the part that (supposedly) lives after death, and a clone wouldn't be immortal, but how in the name of anything that makes sense would one test that?

-Perchance.

atheist_in_foxhole

Spirits, Souls, and Clones: Biology's Latest Challenge to Theology

sakrilege

For the moment I am willing to accept goddidit as the cause of a soul. I think a better way to rephrase my question is Why would god not give a clone a soul? Is god unable or unwilling?


That article was fun to read BTW.
So he thinks the clone will have a soul.

Amos

It will probably not have a new soul. Our soul is incarnate from previous generations and since a clone is the continuity of the present generation it will not have a new soul of its own. Good, bad? Neither good nor bad from my point of view.

As a side isssue, it will be interesting to see if boy children will be born from a clone, or even if clones can reproduce boy children. What did Dolly have?

In botany grafting is equal to cloning. So no miracle just yet, just science.

Philosoft

I'm not sure this makes any sense, or at least the implications seem absurd at first glance. Granting for the moment the very existence of the soul, presumably a soulless clone will be somehow behaviorally distinct from a normal human. I suppose something without a soul wouldn't show 'spiritual' behavior of any kind, no? This ought to be easy - all clones should be, if not atheist, at least not apparently religious.

Surely theists would object to this, but what is the solution?

Seraphim

So, I've seen references to fundamentalist xians claiming that clones will not have souls. Suspending the fact that I don't believe in souls, I find this unnerving. Comments from theists will be greatly appreciated.

My reply : I don't see why Clones don't have souls. Cloning process (despite of considering it to be something dangerous) is one of process of nature and Humans are not doing something that is beyond natural order, just something that is dangerous and could corrupt the entire gene pool.

Puck

I've always thought the soul question is the real reason that christians are so strongly against cloning. It forces them to think about it in a way that makes them very uncomfortable.

Soul, no soul, none of us can know for a fact. My big concern about cloning is the psycological health of the clone. Where the fuck would you fit? We all go through times of disliking our parents, how is
that gonna work out? What is our relationship to the person who we came from? And how would you raise a clone of yourself? Would you be able to differentiate the way normal parents do?

Too weird. For the human created.

Perchance

The essence of the objections seems to be that god wouldn't give a clone a soul because god would disapprove of it (or something of the kind) because man isn't supposed to be doing things "against nature." The "against nature" is a big argument on several levels in the Xian world, apparently, such as against homosexuality.

The other argument I've heard is that souls are necessary for life, and only god can create life. Of course, this seems to bring up a contradiction with the idea that only god can create. If humans can create life too, it necessitates a rethinking of god's power. If humans can't also create life, then people who think only god can have no reason to be upset about cloning.

Another idea that destroys itself with its own contradictions.

-Perchance.

sakrilege

Amos wrote:I did expect Catholics to allow for souls since the RC church likes to lay claim to all, even sperm.



Philosoft wrote:My understanding is that the soul is associated with sin, so IMO the soulless clone would be free from sin and unable(?) to go to heaven or hell. Maybe the next time I get witnessed to I will claim to be a clone without a soul and therefore a waste of time. :P



Seraphim wrote:My thoughts as well.



Puck wrote:The link provided by atheist_in_foxhole is a good explanation of this.



Perchance wrote:But why 'punish' the clone? Though this does fit the god that punishes us for Adam & Eve's actions.



Perchance wrote:Well there are just a few other species out there alive and surviving without souls. And if this is the argument then the clones already produced are indeed a problem!