Bishop in Alien 3 - Human or Android?

[maledoro]

If you can't preserve your mind, what can you preserve that is you?

Your body.

It's not your body; it's someone else's.

Having a person that looks like you isn't vanity. Especially if there is a chance that doesn't resemble you inside.

What is inside is a total irrelevance to a vain person.

The vanity comes from within. It's part of the person's personality, which wouldn't be preserved.

A statue is a far cry from a clone

Indeed, it's far inferior as a vanity project. A living, breathing version of *you* forever is far better than mere statues.

A statue lasts longer than a clone. Not to mention that it's legal and isn't prone to genetic defects.

If you're dead, then it wouldn't matter. If money means that much, then don't blow it on such an expensive project.

You can't take it with you so why not blow it on such a project? A massively expensive project could be a piffling proportion of the overall wealth, anyway.

Not really. Cloning is expensive. When people start companies, they hope that their business outlives themselves. When they die, they tend to put their money into the business and settle for statues in the courtyard or paintings in the lobby.

[maledoro]

I think a clone would be more effective in preserving the memory. It can actually do things to make sure it isn't forgotten. A statue or painting can't.

"Who's that statue of?"

"Just some old guy"

"Who's that old guy over by the park bench?"
"I don't know, he doesn't have an engraving."

[maledoro]

This legal thing though is an assumption. They may well have legalized it for all we know.

With all of the potential for abuse, it's not legal.

[Milo Minderbinder]

I still believe the vanity argument to be plausible. There's plenty of reasons why it might not be the case and plenty why it might. Especially given that vanity is not necessarily logical or reasonable.

And all that is being argued is that it *might* have been a clone and the reason *might* have been vanity. Plausible reasons have been given.

However, maledoro, you appear to be arguing that it definitely isn't the case - and that needs a very high standard of evidence. This evidence has yet to emerge. Conjecture (such as what myself and Mystic Lemons are offering) can support a maybe but your own conjecture cannot prove a definite.

So... are you able to concede that the cloning idea is a possibility?

[Corporal Hicks]

This legal thing though is an assumption. They may well have legalized it for all we know.

With all of the potential for abuse, it's not legal.

Medical science? Who's to say it isn't be using to grow replacement organs and etc.

[Mystic Lemons]

A clone would be far more impressive than a painting.

"Look there's Bishop! He's, like, awesome at robots and cloning!"


I think we have strayed from the topic here. I appreciate that you feel you have answered the cloning question in your own mind with what you believe to be the facts. However, you seem to be taking a rather self-important stance, stating that it's all been covered by your wondrous essay. I continue to believe that the only actual fact is that he still could possibly be a clone, as nothing in the films state otherwise.

And my opinion on the original question is that his emotional outburst points to him being human. Even if he was a droid programmed to look and act human, with human emotions, screaming "NOOOOO!!!" when it is too late to change Ripley's mind would be pointless and illogical.

[The Ultimate Predator]

This legal thing though is an assumption. They may well have legalized it for all we know.

With all of the potential for abuse, it's not legal.

Medical science? Who's to say it isn't be using to grow replacement organs and etc.

Exactly.

[maledoro]

So... are you able to concede that the cloning idea is a possibility?

The more I think about it: no. I'm ashamed of myself for overlooking one of the basic rules of debate: the burden of proof is on the person who claims that something exists. So far, there is no proof that he is a clone. Plain and simple, there would have to be something in the movies or related materials that points to it.

All I can say is show me the evidence that he's a clone; not speculation.

[maledoro]

Medical science? Who's to say it isn't be using to grow replacement organs and etc.

Read all the hooplah about stem cell research and its legal ramifications. Stem cells. A fully fuctional clone of a human being is even more shocking.

[Milo Minderbinder]

Isn't the evidence that he's a clone the fact that a human of him was on 20th century Earth and appears to be ages in the future too? Based on the following two assumptions:

The one in Alien3 is in fact human
He does not simply resemble an ancestor identically

[maledoro]

I think we have strayed from the topic here. I appreciate that you feel you have answered the cloning question in your own mind with what you believe to be the facts.

Not to sound condenscending, but they are rooted in reality. I read science magazines, newspapers and have access to legal documents.

However, you seem to be taking a rather self-important stance, stating that it's all been covered by your wondrous essay. I continue to believe that the only actual fact is that he still could possibly be a clone, as nothing in the films state otherwise.

Nothing states that he is. A basic rule of debate is that you have to prove something. I'm under no obligation to disprove it.

And my opinion on the original question is that his emotional outburst points to him being human. Even if he was a droid programmed to look and act human, with human emotions, screaming "NOOOOO!!!" when it is too late to change Ripley's mind would be pointless and illogical.

Just because he's human, doesn't mean that he's a clone.

[Milo Minderbinder]

A fully fuctional clone of a human being is even more shocking.

Attitudes change. Many things that were once considered shocking are now commonplace.

[Mystic Lemons]

Just because he's human, doesn't mean that he's a clone.

Nobody is saying that.

[maledoro]

A fully fuctional clone of a human being is even more shocking.

Attitudes change. Many things that were once considered shocking are now commonplace.

Imagine me employing a clone of you to commit a crime to frame you... As long as that is a possibility, cloning would be illegal.

[maledoro]

Isn't the evidence that he's a clone the fact that a human of him was on 20th century Earth and appears to be ages in the future too? Based on the following two assumptions:

The one in Alien3 is in fact human
He does not simply resemble an ancestor identically

All the more reason that he isn't a clone.