Would a cloned human have a soul? Why...or why not?

Question

I've often wondered about this.

Garwy...I see your point, but the egg is still a fertilized egg conceived by two humans. The clone is not...the "conception" process is totally different...and it's from one person...a replicate.

I guess this also raises the question, if the clone does not have a soul, but lives and functions...would he/she be inherently evil...lacking the ability to tell right from wrong?

Continuing on my last question...Imagine cloning Jesus...It's possible if scientists could find a sample of his DNA. If a clone does not have a soul...or even if he does for that matter...This would not be the same Jesus immaculately conceived 2+ millenia ago. But imagine the reaction of the faithful.

To ask why scientists would want to clone a human...because they can. Someone somewhere is probably trying right now. Remember a few years ago, there was a scientist in Spain (I think) who said he had already done it. Turned out he was lying, but it illustrates the point that someone is going to try.

Jonjon...Good comment about the twin who had the absorbed twin. I thought about the issue too. I happen to believe in reincarnation more than any particular organized religion. My understanding of such things is that the soul recognizes when a viable birth cannot occur and simply does not enter the body...waiting for one that will come to term.

Answer 1

I'd say yes. Whether a clone is made from an egg and grown from an embryo, or somehow emerges full grown, the clone will immediately begin to have different experiences from the original. For example, everyone wants to clone Albert Einstein, but the clone wouldn't grow up in the Europe of 100 years ago with the original parents. It would live in a completely different environment. So, the clone would develop a different mindset, character, response to environment, viewpoint of life, etc. The clone will stand as a separate, authentic human being: heart, mind, body, and soul.

Answer 2

Well, I have to say that I don't believe that humans created by natural means have souls, so my answer is NO, because souls do not exist.

However, if you're wondering whether a cloned human would have the same emotions, feelings, and reactions that we commonly identify as "soul," the answer would be yes.

Further - and more importantly, because so many people fail to realize this point when discussing human cloning - a cloned human would have its own, distinct personality and would not be the mental or emotional duplicate of the original. This would probably give more credence to the appearance of having an individual soul. Our personalities and behaviors are shaped by the world we grow up in. It is impossible for a clone to be raised in exactly the same manner as its original was raised, to give it the same experiences, and to make sure it has all the same pieces of a personality.

All a clone is is a being with DNA that is identical to another being's DNA. Exactly like identical twins, but made in a laboratory instead of in the womb.

Answer 3

This is an interesting question, and something I haven't really looked into, cloning I mean, I heard on the news of the cloned sheeps but don't understand what goes on to producing a clone.

I don't know why we would want to clone people, we are already over populated they tell us...or has that changed now.

I really don't know the answer to this question because I am assuming it would be man's creation totally void of necessary corporal affiliation but would still be a human being, how many tries will it take before they would get it right, and what about the fall out those that make it but are missing this or that... this could happen too no. very interesting here is a star

Answer 4

Tsk tsk tsk. I seem to be not inclined to answer this question at this moment because my mind is being affected by my emotion. But I'm going to answer nevertheless. First let me clarify that the concept of soul is vague to me. In my opinion, however, if a cat has a soul why cannot a cloned individual. But I think it would be easier if we remove the "soul" from the issue. For simplicity let's just say that the atoms and molecules of living things are so arranged such that they can live. In that regard there's not much difference between the cloned and the clone. To have life is the alpha and the omega.
I think that's the greatest and the simplest truth but the most diffucult to accept because nobody wants to die forever. And hence they invented the soul. Even Jesus Christ died. And his SOUL, his "existence" died with him. The nature has formulas for creating life but it has no cure for death. By cloning man has just discovered one of the formulas. Just as life is inevitable, death is also inevitable. But before the birth of life and after death there is nothing but cold and darkness. Between those infinite periods of cold and darkness is the warm light of life. If you want to call that warm glow of life as soul, then I may agree with you. We have only one life and so we must enjoy the rain and the sun.

Answer 5

God gives life, and eternal souls!!!

If you accept the concept that aborted babies are give an immortal soul, as I do, it is a small step to accept that God will also provide a soul in the event of a successful cloning.

But it is HIS choise...and we have absolutely no right to second guess Him, either way.

I am speculating YES...but it is not covered in the Bibe, so it' only a guess.

Actually, I doubt a successful human clone will be done.

Cloned animals are badly flawed!!!

Answer 6

This is a darn good quesiton- the same quesitons been asked "If you teleport someone like on Star Trek- is the soul transported or is it destroyed?"

James Blish, who wrote the very first Star Trek novel back in 1968, ("Spock Must Die" is the name of the book) attempts to answer this question.

Anyhow- the transporter malfunctions, theres 2 Spocks, one of them gets killed in a fight- and at the first part of the book, Dr McCoy asks the question with the transporter.

At the books ending, with Scotty and McCoy arguing about it, Kirk finally says "The ability to reason and ask the question would seem to be its own answer concering the persons own soul"

Which goes right back to Decarte's "I think, therefore I am"...

Answer 7

Well, if by soul you mean the energy of life then it would depend on whether or not that clone survived and lived. If it is a walking talking clone then one must assume it is composed of matter (atoms) and energy. At that level we could likely all agree that it was alive - and thus soulful. Moving past that level we enter the arena of opinion, and if you've spent any time at all in here - you know how that goes.

Answer 8

The first problem would be to define what we mean by "soul," and to determine whether ANY human actually has one. Once we've done that, we can set to work on the cloned human question.

People have mentioned twins - what about that girl who was in the news recently, who had 4 arms and 4 legs? Her twin had died in the womb and she had "absorbed" its parts into her own body. Did her soul also absorb its soul?

Answer 9

I think a fetus will receive a soul at, or shortly before, birth.

Even a clone will be grown in liquid like, amniotic fluid. Right?

Answer 10

Seeing how the clone would be an exact human duplicate of yourself, it's almost like having a twin. they are indeed human but have no right to identify themselves as you, they are individual persons and will have quirks in their personalities and None of your exact memories they can only attempt to replicate yours. That's what makes it an unethical Malpractice of medicine and certainly not to use them for body parts, that is Playing god just a bit too much..it's the Physicians who don't have souls that deceptively practice it.