Will Clones Have Souls?

[brownprose]

---

hahayyy...abot naman ta ani'g plants oi...hehehe ang bato kaha no naa ba kaha nay soul?

[abuot]

Or if we indeed have one, how do we define a soul?

i think there would be no concrete definition of what a soul is since it is so abstract and varies depending on the belief and/or religion of each individual..

..just as the answer to this threads question would vary depending on the factors and definition taken into consideration by each idividual..

hhmmm..

[pointman]

for me...yes. as long as its a living being it has a soul.

[JX]

for me pod, naay soul ang clones.. copy gud na.. murag xerox ba, naa pod prints.. hehe..

[tripwire]

It doesn't mean if not created by Man/Woman relationship it doesn;t have a soul. That's a living creature! A human to be exact. It culticates how precious life is. Soul also doesn't have to be human... even songs and musics have it.

[grovestreet]

for me, i don't believe in souls. Once man is able to duplicate a mind capable of storing memory and can think rationally then that is the "soul".

the way i see it, soul is not something metaphysical. the human brain is the soul. It's not some kind of spirit.

[NASYO]

maybe, maybe not..

[Seraph]

wala pud cguro clones = made by human. humans = made by God. humans = soul. so if ang clones = soul. made by human = made by God. i think you get the point guys

[simoncpu]

A soul is synonymous with consciousness, I think, so I believe that a clone would have a soul too. If and when AI would become a reality (i.e., it passes the Turing test), I think it would have a soul too.

[ simon.cpu ]

[kittyganda]

if we are going to be theological about it (making philosophy as a more stable state of reference) ST. Thomas Aquinas on the concept of man would likely be in disagreement with genetic technology right now more specifically on cloning human beings. St. Thomas believes that man is a substantial unity of body and soul. Man is both body and soul. but the soul is not the body nor the body the soul. the soul's existence is solely independent on the existence of others. thus, it exists in itself (this, by simplest word, describe the meaning of a substance). what st. Thomas is trying to say is that, man as substance (which is the soul) needs a another substance (which is a body) to give form to matter. the soul gives form to the body and the body which gives matter to the soul. this is philosophy of st. Thomas gives an ethical implication on the importance of man to his soul and the soul to her material form (the body). what do these things got to do with man and cloning? the answer is everything. you see, man's existence is both a material existence and a spiritual existence. man is both a material substance and a spiritual substance that make him a unique existing being. without these two substances, man is only a word. in contrary to this, cloning, as a scientific breakthrough( this I do not know..if its really taken as an achievement) forfeits the Thomistic idea of a substance that exists independently; and needs no other things to exist as such.
if man then can be cloned is such a way that his souls are also cloned and distributed evenly (if not shared commonly to other clones) would it not affect man's state as a single entity both matter and form. if so, then isn't it unfair for one to suffer and let the other clones live just because the former is no longer functioning and could easily be abandoned since the replicas are fresh already and may as well be practical of the seemingly new being from the same genetic structure? if, let's say, the original composite being is sick and tired of his life, can the cloned souls resort to a new reason to cling into just to continue living? what if, the personal experiences of the former, which are taken as the life of the self, may now be treasured for eternity as to give way for death to take its course, will it affect the clones new disposition in life? Is the former's experiences engraved on the latter? if not, then the soul of the former is of different stance to that of the latter. if man can be cloned a thousandfold, just to escape mortality and death or whatever insane reason would there be, can a soul be replicated as well to follow the same footsteps of the former. "no one can step at the same river twice." if change then is what the scientists have in minds, then change ( of various degrees) is what they'll be getting. if man be genetically controlled nowadays, the soul will never be controlled, for it belongs to the ULTIMATE SUBSTANCE whose power controls all substances in the world and beyond ours. and for all stupid substances, who by their earthly lives, play the folly role of the gods... i see no mature reason ( and never would i entertain one) for them to create an uncreated cloned beings without a soul. if St. Thomas would have risen back from the grave, he'll be the first one to protest on this seemingly odd concept of enhancing the structure of a HUMAN PERSON.