If we can upload our mind into a new cloned bodies when we die, then we will have achive inmortality, this is the greater achivement of the human cloning process in my view, but there will be to many moral and religious question on this, even if the technical process can be perfect.

if you can live forever does it devalue the meaning of life? this is the question that will be hard to answer. or a even more interesting one is if you clone yourself and there is two you, are the two the same person, what happen to your property right, do you guys now have share ownership of everything you have?

a much larger problem deriving from cloning would be over-population. even at the rate we are going now, our way of self preservation is already proven to be our own self-destruction, let alone having more clones.

If it’s possible to clone your body, maybe a younger stronger version of your current body, and give it life...wouldn't that body's mind come in a blank state? I mean that the second version of you might have consciousness/life but it wouldn't have collected any data or experiences or have the same memories as you right now.

If downloading/saving and uploading your current mind into a new body is possible, I think I’d have a more personal/identity questions to ponder.

For example, a frail old man is going to die sooner than later, so he cloned his body and uploaded a copy of his mind into this younger version of his body. Technically it’s like immortality because his consciousness will live on, but his original consciousness is still in this old body...I doubt he’ll feel ok terminating himself tho.

Unless it’s a sudden, accidental death. Imagine waking up on the operation table and the doc said “Welcome back buddy, you were hit by a bus yesterday and died, we couldn’t save you. But lucky for you, we have a copy of your consciousness and uploaded it onto this clone of you. The last time you came in to back-up your mind to our database was a month ago, so you didn’t miss much.”

ur clone's DNA is still ur old DNA. for example, u're using ur DNA to clone urself at 40 yr old. after 30-40 yrs, u die, and ur clone will probably die that time.

the telomeric region decreases after each cell division. so when no telemores to loss, the important part of the DNA will be loss.
this is just a theory though. it can be use to explain why Dolly die so early.

What you say makes some sense. Yes, the rich are, in a way, the best in acquiring wealth. But then again it's hard to say that the rich have the best genes. Maybe it's intelligence, which is in inherited. But so many other things have to be taken into consideration. Upbringing also plays a part in determining one's future. And I wouldn't say that children born in the richest families have the best upbringing. For example, some people are born into riches but die in poverty because they do not know how to manage their riches.

Furthermore, a person can be rich by winning a lottery, or through a stroke of luck, become rich. For example, if you happen to inherit a piece of cheap land from your parents and keep it, and 30 years down the road, the government plans to build something big there, and is willing to compensate you with many zeros on a cheque. Well, then you've just hit the jackpot. Although it's rare, it happens. But this doesn't mean the person is in anyway, genetically superior to another.

Besides, the trend shows that the human population has been increasing exponentially in the last century. Why the last century? It coincides with the improvement of medical knowledge and techniques to an extent such that the number of births can exceed the number of deaths in the human population by a large ratio. If cloning were to be allowed, these people would make the human population increase even further than without cloning, because at any one time, those who are cloned will continue to live way beyond their years and when birth rate stays the same (if we assume that cloning has no effect on the present birth rate), the total number of humans will increase. And if the therapeutic cloning and organ transplant procedure becomes more affordable over time (say due to breakthroughs or the discovery of new medical methods), the rate of increase will also increase.

Ultimately, when overpopulation occurs, and if we don't find a solution (to overpopulation) by then, we would have to face the full force of natural selection, because it would then be a competition for inadequate resources. Therefore, I think it would be wise to postpone (if stopping is not an option) the usage of therapeutic cloning until we find a solution to overpopulation.

This post has been edited by Thinkingfox: Jun 28 2009, 02:02 AM

humans are so developed that optimal "genes" or inheritance no longer matter. natural selection is simply survival of the fittest, the factor that gives one individual an edge over another. in the animal kingdom it may be strength. for humans, it may be wits, it may be wealth. simply put, the richest survive, regardless of genes and whatnot. there are no rules to this game of survival.

i would really love to clone jessica alba, mandy moore and let them live in my house...haha....but i think cloning is possible cause we already cloned a goat before right?

This post has been edited by Shah_15: Jun 29 2009, 12:47 AM

It depends on the situation. In times of peace, it may be wealth. In times of war, it may be it's ideology. When overpopulation occurs, it might be something different. So, I think it would be wise to avoid accelerating overpopulation through cloning.

i don't think we could achieve immortality by "uploading our mind" into new bodies. imo, even if we can recreate our mind in another form, like digitally for example, it wouldn't really be ours, it's merely a copy of our memory while our true consciousness will always bound to our self. when we die, our consciousness ends there. the copied memory will be another version of our consciousness once transferred to another body, unnoticeable to the clone, but our own original self (the consciousness) stay dead and won't be transferred to the other body. in other word, it's not a continuous process.

even if the clones retains the memory of the original person, i don't think we should think of him as the same person as the original.

speaking non-scifi, how do we even "copy" memories onto a clone? as far as my understanding goes about cloning, the cloned human's life and therefore experience and knowledge begins when it is conceived by the host (a woman). it may turn out to be a completely different "human" than the original as it grows and develops. aside from implementing a device which stores memory digitally and somehow finding a way to synchronize the device and the brain, transferring "memory" will not work.

cloning a human whose thinking and actions mirror the original is completely sci-fi. humans are as much affected by nature as well as nurture in their growth.

The cloning of human just involved in body or hardware, it has not much meaning for you or individual. Your cloned DNA or another person is not you, just like having another twin brother of you which shared the same DNA.

You cannot upload your mind, intelligence into the cloned body.

To simplified, you cloned the hardware (body) which is identical to you currently, but software wise is totally a new one, your mind, intelligence, thinking etc.

The cloned person is another blank HDD, just the HDD is as same as you.

i mean just that.

This post has been edited by Shadow Kun: Jun 29 2009, 04:31 PM

one more thing. say memory and knowledge can somehow be transferred by some stroke of genius.

1. original human clones himself at age 50 and dies. the question is - when is a suitable time to transfer the original's memory to the clone? 10 years? 20 years? that is, of course if the human brain can even take that sort of amount of information,

if say memory were transferred to the clone at 20 years of age. wont the original "time travel" to 20 years in the future? and 20 years is a long time if u ask me...it would be pretty scary.

err i dunno. depends on what your intention for the transfer i think. anyways notice that in my first post that you quoted, i was speaking on "even if" basis as a reply to robertngo regarding his idea of achieving immortality by preserving memories in clones. all of that is still sci-fi in today's context. also i think he speak of cloning as reproducing the exact copy of the body at time of cloning, not creating a baby clone from the DNA that needs to be grown to adulthood so the issue of when to transfer the memory doesn't exist. you just transfer them instantly after death of the original. again, it's still sci-fi in today's context.

ARE WE READY FOR IT?

What the cons and pros on it? If it is successful....
Somehow we can live eternally by the power of science and etc.

Ok if we got cloning technology available and able to transfer memories - based on the quote above "Somehow we can live eternally.."

My Answer : NOT A CHANCE.

Let me explain why in a dramatical way...

Subject A : I think I am coming to my end....
Doctor : Do not worry, soon you will be resurrected and live a healthy life as normal
Subject A : I hope so, *cough* well.. goodbye world.. *closed eye*
Doctor : Confirmed subject dead at 12:00am 12/12/2300
Nurse : The clone is ready doctor.
Doctor : Begin the memory transfer process now.

*with a data rate of 5000GB/s equipped with an error correction and verification tools* - 5 minutes later...

Subject B : *open his eyes - saw dead body of himself next to him* I am .. I am.. ALIVE!! Doctor thank you very much!
Doctor : Piece of cake. How's your memory?
Subject B : Based on the procedure, you told me if I can remember AB111 which happened when I was 20 years, and GH1100 when I was 40 years, I think everything is fine with me.
Doctor : Darn.. you may want these back then *shows keys to Lambo*
Subject B : Of course i still need this, ok bye doc, i'm going home now. Ciow!

Now, from our view - let's observe.

Subject A died.
Subject B (clone) lived with Subject A memory.

Subject B is still Subject B, Subject A still dies and goes to heaven / hell.

Subject B is a fake, it's a new lifeform (artificial if I may add) with a Blank memory, which memories of Subject A had been added on to it. Subject B THINKS he lived on, but in reality, NOT.

Any case happens, you DIE.

I know this thread prohibits religious talks, but I must insert this quotation from the Islamic view "There is cure for every sickness, EXCEPT dead"

Anyway, it's an interesting issue to discuss.

another way to explain it.

@shadow - i guess mine is the layman term version

It is just sci-fic.

You cannot clone a 'blank body' without a brain or blank brain, which in order/wait for transferring 'you' into it.

If the cloned body has brain (let label as B), then it has its own thinking aka as B personnel, not "you".

The more realistic sci-fic to 'transfer into another body or clone', is through sterm cell which develop organ for you to replace one by one, which is more realistic/futuristic discussion.

hmm..
agreed.
but the only weakness is, you still can't replace your brain with a new one.

Another perspective is:

Subject A: Ahh... (breathing back). Damn, I'm not dead yet.
As you a bit unconscious, you heard a conversation in the room (and turn and look at ur left) .

Subject B (ur clone): *open his eyes - saw dead body of himself next to him* I am .. I am.. ALIVE!! Doctor thank you very much!
Doctor : Piece of cake. How's your memory?... (bla bla and the talks continue)

and he walk away from the room for tonight date with ur girlfriend and you just WTF!!.

Conclusion: Subject B is just like your twin and the only different is he got 100% of ur memory.