Hello Engyo,
You said:
Another point at issue is that if a clone is an exact genetic duplicate of you, then an evil spouse, say, could have you cloned, the clone hypnotized, drugged or whatever, and then eliminate you and replace you with the clone (under their control). How would one prove this had been done?
What if a clone decides he/she will "replace" the original? Whose rights trump? Does a clone have rights? Are they legally a person? Etc., etc., etc.,
(These are from old sci-fi stories)
As I am an avid fan of science/speculative-fiction stories myself, I just thought I'd lend my two cents to your hypothetical premise.
The conceivable future presents the high likelihood of human cloning as reality, but the scenario you suggest is a quantum leap forward from simple genetic duplication ("Makin' copies...").
Consider:
1) Natural, genetically identical twins, triplets, etc. are born everyday into this world (identical twins appx. 3.5 per 1000). Most are reared in the same household/environment. Yet indisputably, each twin retains and evinces their own unique personality and character - from similar tastes/behavior...to wildly divergent. Yet biologically speaking, right down to their DNA, they're "identical", correct? Well, yes and no. Yes, they share identical DNA, but from their first moments of awareness, their brains are "evolving" separately...quite literally. Studies demonstrate that each of us actually experience constant brain cell "restructuring" that is unique to the individual, and virtually impossible to duplicate in another individual.
Think of it this way: Two cars roll off the assembly line, one right after the other. They were assembled in the exact same way, by the exact same people, using the same equipment and materials. For all intents and purposes, the two cars are physically "identical". Now, one car goes to a commuter that drives 60 miles through stop-and-go traffic each day. The other "identical" car goes to a church lady that only drives five miles on Sundays. After five years, each car will evidence characteristics unique to it's own use. Assuming each has received periodic maintenance and due care, they may still appear "identical", but they will almost certainly have manifested their own distinct and observable differences in wear and tear and "driveability". And...despite either car's initial heritage, no amount of repair or restoration will be able to reclaim either's original state the day it rolled off the assembly line.
2) Bearing point 1 in mind, the concept of exacting duplication of environment/experience as manifested in the ever evolving human brain is a technology that has no foundational science or theory to even pursue. We can make identical copies of new cars, washing machines, and watches readily and effectively. But it's virtually impossible to record (and subsequently duplicate) the exacting nuances (use, wear and tear) of your foyer's grandfather clock in such a way as to make another that mirrors it's exacting operation. Sure, you can make an exacting reproduction, that mimics all of the original's internal working parts, and external dings and dents -- but it still won't be the same.
Sci-fi books/movies (and more notably within the horror genre) have always had fun with the idea of machines or phenomena that can effect "mind transference". Such is the stuff of fancy and fantasy, but the actual "science" of such is whimsical at best (not unlike time-travel machines). While true that much brain function/activity is electrical, it is also essentially chemical. Speculation (and sci-fi) have suggested the prospect of "recording" and storage of the electrical signals of brain activity for later "playback" (especially as they may relate to dreams and recent memory). While such "recordings" and transference to storage of simple electrical patterns seems straightforward enough (like a CD or DVD), it's "recording" the inseparably coinciding chemical changes that are well beyond any current serious scientific contemplation. We just ain't anywhere close to that, and won't be anytime soon.
3) At this point, all clones (of anything from mice to corn) are "born" as "babies", not fully mature-stage adults. Human clones would be no different. True enough, that advances in the study/application of certain medical therapies that involve the use of HGH (Human Growth Hormone), and other advances in hormonal studies might provide the opportunity of accelerating the prospective growth and physical maturation of a clone, reducing both the gestational period and "normal" time of pre-to-post pubescence, thus making a bigger, or even full-grown adult clone of yourself in say, 30 days (for the sake of the hypothetical)? Even if it were theoretically possible to manifest another fully grown clone of you to your current age...without your own unique and irreproducible "personality", such a clone would be, from a mental standpoint, a newborn infant - not unlike a "normal" identical twin born twenty years later (a concept that is not that far-fetched, btw, though hard to see any rationale for, say...separating identical twin fertilized ova, and freezing one, while bringing the other to gestational term - "storing" the other identical ova for another time for eventual gestation. Weird, but certainly feasible, even today).
And so, until science/technology can:
Find an exacting methodology to replicate any person's unique combination of enviornment, experience, and personality, then...
..."grow" a clone to adult stage/age that matches your own (never mind the issues of replicating your own scars, healed bones, worn teeth, alcohol-damaged liver and smoke-scarred lungs, beer belly, etc.) for appropriate transfer of your exacting personality...
...then transfer such exacting and unique "recorded" information into a nascent clone's brain to make another "you", then...
...we'll have some legitimate concerns to ponder regarding your presented hypothetical - but not before then.
Thank goodness.
But it's fun to speculate on...
...kinda spooky too.
) for human cloning.
