Identity and singolarity
I am me and you are you. Apparently it is a simple statement. In reality it is not because that “I” could become a “you” and that “you” could become an “I”. It seems a linguistic game. We are talking instead about genetics and the possible ethical and moral implications of one of the most extraordinary and incredible discoveries of these recent years: cloning. But let’s try to understand something.
Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua were born some weeks ago. We are talking about two nice and funny monkeys. However, they are not twins but clones obtained in a Chinese laboratory through methods that provide for the “duplication of the genetic heritage of a single cell or an entire organism” (see below).
The scientists assert that cloning non-human primates could actively contribute to the research of numerous neurodegenerative diseases and therefore also to the discovery of ad hoc therapies.
The advantages therefore would be numerous but we have to consider the risk of the loss of the individual identity, of what distinguishes and characterizes us.
Each of us is different, our singularity is our personal mark. But what could happen if somebody decided that someone’s uniqueness is worth more than someone else’s? What about human diversity and variety? What would happen to what “does not fit”? It seems like a distant scenario but the risk subsists and we shouldn’t underestimated it.
Personally I think that every discovery for the wellness and health of everyone is a blessing. However, we must think about the possible implications and possible dangers.
What do you think about cloning and the risk to lose the personal identity? Share, if you want, your thoughts with me and the other readers and philosophers.
Thank you so much and enjoy reading!
On freewords you will find an interesting article about this argument written by my colleague and friend Enza Bronzuoli.
Maria Domenica Depalo