genetic duplication (noun) – the process of creating an exact biological copy through DNA replication.
Example: Pet cloning is a form of genetic duplication that mirrors the donor’s DNA.

replicate (verb) – to reproduce or copy something precisely.
Example: The laboratory succeeded in replicating the dog’s genetic material.

surrogate (noun) – a substitute, especially a female animal carrying an embryo for another.
Example: The cloned embryo is implanted into a surrogate mother.

viability (noun) – the ability to live or develop successfully.
Example: Not all cloned embryos achieve full biological viability.

sentience (noun) – the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.
Example: Cloning raises questions about the sentience and individuality of the copy.

ethical quandary (noun) – a complex moral dilemma without a clear right answer.
Example: Scientists face an ethical quandary when science advances faster than regulation.

commodify (verb) – to treat something of moral or emotional value as a product for sale.
Example: Critics argue that cloning commodifies life itself.

anthropomorphism (noun) – the act of attributing human emotions or qualities to animals or objects.
Example: Pet cloning may reflect a form of anthropomorphism — projecting human grief and desire onto animals.

notion of identity (phrase) – the idea or understanding of what makes someone or something unique.
Example: Cloning challenges our very notion of identity and individuality.

biotechnology (noun) – the use of living systems and organisms to develop products or technologies.
Example: Advances in biotechnology have made animal cloning commercially possible.

Exercise 2 – Article

The Quest to Bring Them Back: Cloning and the Promise of Forever

To many people, a pet represents unconditional love — a bond that transcends time and species. When that bond is broken by death, the resulting emptiness can feel unbearable. For some, modern biotechnology offers a tantalizing solution: cloning.

Several companies now promise to “restore” beloved animals for a price ranging between $50,000 and $100,000. Scientists extract DNA from preserved tissue, insert it into an enucleated donor egg, and implant the resulting embryo into a surrogate mother. Months later, a genetically identical puppy or kitten is born — a mirror of the original, at least on a cellular level.

Supporters describe this as a triumph of science and sentiment: a way to overcome mortality itself. They argue that cloning could also have legitimate applications, such as reviving endangered species or preserving rare genetic traits.

Yet opponents see a profound ethical quandary. They contend that cloning turns affection into commodification, exploiting grief for profit. Moreover, a clone is not a reincarnation; it may share its predecessor’s genes but not its memories, temperament, or sentience. Each life is shaped by experience as much as by DNA.

In the end, the question extends beyond science. It touches the notion of identity, the morality of controlling life, and humanity’s refusal to accept loss. Cloning may promise comfort — but it also forces us to confront the limits of love, science, and the human desire to play creator.

Exercise 3 – Discussion

1. Would you ever clone a pet if money were no object? Why or why not?

2. Does cloning preserve life, or merely simulate it?

3. Is grief a valid justification for scientific experimentation?

4. Could cloning undermine the uniqueness of living beings?

5. Should biotechnology companies be allowed to profit from emotional vulnerability?

Exercise 4 – Further Discussion

1. What distinguishes ethical science from scientific exploitation?

2. How might cloning affect biodiversity and natural evolution?

3. Should cloning be used to resurrect extinct or endangered species?

4. How do religion and philosophy influence opinions about cloning?

5. If human cloning became viable, would society ever accept it — and under what conditions?

Exercise 5 – Writing Task

Essay Prompt:
“Cloning transforms loss into a business transaction, offering the illusion of immortality. Discuss whether cloning pets represents scientific progress or moral regression.”

Sample Essay 

The cloning of pets occupies a grey zone between innovation and indulgence. While it demonstrates the astonishing reach of modern science, it also exposes the moral fragility of human emotion.

To begin with, cloning replicates biology but not being. A cloned dog may share its predecessor’s genetic blueprint, yet its consciousness and character will differ. Memory, affection, and individuality arise from lived experience — not DNA. Treating a clone as a resurrected pet reveals a misunderstanding of sentience itself.

Moreover, the practice risks turning love into commerce. Pet cloning industries commodify grief, offering a scientific illusion of reunion in exchange for vast sums of money. Behind each successful clone lies a chain of failed embryos and surrogate mothers used as tools of production. Such procedures raise questions not only about animal welfare but about human morality.

Supporters may argue that cloning could preserve endangered species, but this utilitarian defense cannot justify the normalization of genetic duplication for personal comfort. When we use science to soothe emotional wounds rather than to serve collective good, we cross a philosophical boundary.

In conclusion, cloning pets represents a poignant paradox: a technological success but an ethical failure. It reflects humanity’s longing to defeat loss — and its inability to accept that some goodbyes are meant to last.