Search results for 'Cloning, Organism' (try it on Scholar)

10 found
Sort by:
  1. Christina Brandt (2012). Hybrid Times: Theses on the Temporalities of Cloning. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 35 (1):75-81.score: 78.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Louis M. Guenin (2008). The Morality of Embryo Use. Cambridge University Press.score: 60.0
    Is it permissible to use a human embryo in stem cell research, or in general as a means for benefit of others? Acknowledging each embryo as an object of moral concern, Louis M.Guenin argues that it is morally permissible to decline intrauterine transfer of an embryo formed outside the body, and that from this permission and the duty of beneficence, there follows a consensus justification for using donated embryos in service of humanitarian ends. He then proceeds to show how this (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Elisa Eiseman (2003). The National Bioethics Advisory Commission: Contributing to Public Policy. Rand.score: 60.0
    Details goverment, private, and international response to the policy recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Bernard E. Rollin (1999). Keeping Up with the Cloneses -- Issues in Human Cloning. Journal of Ethics 3 (1):51-71.score: 54.0
    The advent of cloning animals has created a maelstrom of social concern about the ethical issues associated with the possibility of cloning humans. When the ethical concerns are clearly examined, however, many of them turn out to be less matters of rational ethics than knee-jerk emotion, religious bias, or fear of that which is not understood. Three categories of real and spurious ethical concerns are presented and discussed: 1) that cloning is intrinsically wrong, 2) that cloning must lead to bad (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Arlene Judith Klotzko (2004). A Clone of Your Own?: The Science and Ethics of Cloning. Oxford University Press.score: 54.0
    Someday soon (if it hasn't happened in secret already), a human will be cloned, and mankind will embark on a scientific and moral journey whose destination cannot be foretold. In Copycats: The Science and Ethics of Cloning, Arlene Judith Klotzko describes the new world of possibilities that can be glimpsed over the horizon. In a lucid and engaging narrative, she explains that the technology to create clones of living beings already exists, inaugurated in 1996 by Dolly the sheep, the first (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jane Maienschein (2001). On Cloning: Advocating History of Biology in the Public Interest. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 34 (3):423 - 432.score: 54.0
    Cloning -- the process of creating a cell, tissue line or even a complete organism from a single cell -- or the strands that led to the cloning of a mammal, Dolly, are not new. Yet the media coverage of Dolly's inception raised a range of reactions from fear or moral repulsion, to cautious optimism. The implications for controlling human reproduction were clearly in the forefront, though many issues about animals emerged as well. On topics of public interest such (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Robert P. George (2004). Human Cloning and Embryo Research: The 2003 John J. Conley Lecture on Medical Ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (1):3-20.score: 42.0
    The author, a member of the U.S.President's Council on Bioethics, discussesethical issues raised by human cloning, whetherfor purposes of bringing babies to birth or forresearch purposes. He first argues that everycloned human embryo is a new, distinct, andenduring organism, belonging to the speciesHomo sapiens, and directing its owndevelopment toward maturity. He then distinguishesbetween two types of capacities belonging toindividual organisms belonging to this species,an immediately exerciseable capacity and abasic natural capacity that develops over time. He argues that it is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Timothy Mosteller (2005). Aristotle and Headless Clones. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (4):339-350.score: 42.0
    Cloned organisms can be genetically altered so that they do not exhibit higher brain functioning. This form of therapeutic cloning allows for genetically identical organs and tissues to be harvested from the clone for the use of the organism that is cloned. “Spare parts” cloning promises many opportunities for future medical advances. What is the ontological and ethical status of spare parts, headless clones? This paper attempts to answer this question from the perspective of Aristotle’s view of the soul. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. R. Stephen Crespi (2000). An Analysis of Moral Issues Affecting Patenting Inventions in the Life Sciences: A European Perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (2):157-180.score: 18.0
    Following the 1980 US Supreme Court decision to allow a patent on a living organism, debate has continued on the moral issues involved in biotechnology patents of many kinds and remains a contentious issue for those opposed to the use of biotechnology in industry and agriculture. Attitudes to patenting in the life sciences, including those of the research scientists themselves, are analysed. The relevance of morality to patent law is discussed here in an international context with particular reference to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Gérard Battail (2009). Living Versus Inanimate: The Information Border. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 2 (3):321-341.score: 8.0
    The traditional divide between nature and culture restricts to the latter the use of information. Biosemiotics claims instead that the divide between nature and culture is a mere subdivision within the living world but that semiosis is the specific feature which distinguishes the living from the inanimate. The present paper is intended to reformulate this basic tenet in information-theoretic terms, to support it using information-theoretic arguments, and to show that its consequences match reality. It first proposes a ‘receiver-oriented’ interpretation of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation