> I'm not sure if that post is a troll

It's not. I've had this idea for some time, and I'm absolutely serious.

We already grow human cells in culture. It's like growing an extremely delicate plant. The HeLa cell line is derived from Henrietta Lacks, and she's been dead for some time. There's nothing wrong with growing and manipulating cells like this. Eukaryotic cells are as brainless as prokaryotic ones. This is how we do basic research.

We create multicellular tissue cultures, often using the extracellular matrix from cadavers. Again, basic research. Nothing wrong, nobody hurt.

If you can grow a human body without a head and brain, how is that ethically different from a plant? Please explain it to me. As long as you guarantee the brain never develops, it's ethically cleaner than telling a white lie.

Personhood requires a brain. Period.

I don't believe in a soul. So that's not an issue either.

Next explain to me why we shouldn't do this, because headless clones will cut organ transplant waiting lists to zero and help us cure cancer, diabetes, and every other human disease that doesn't directly involve the brain.

> Personhood requires a brain. Period.

Well, it requires a complex nervous system.

How many neurons are there outside of the brain?

How many neurons create a sensing, feeling being?

It's an assumption to say that the only way for consciousness around organic feeling to exist is through a brain. We don't know that.

I was under the impression that the nervous system outside the brain is only propagating signals back and forth, and all the actual compute is localized in the brain. If that's true, then the GP's idea makes sense; if it isn't, then that's a can of worms we need to sift through eventually.

If you want to be taken seriously you need to specify what morals is this violating exactly, it may be obvious to you but not to your readers.

As Shapiro says, you need to be taken seriously where it matters. If you sincerely need to ask which morals this violates, you show that you have no classical humanistic education. Such an education cannot be provided in a web forum.

It is sad that because of a couple of psychopaths tech people are not taken seriously outside of web forums.

Is easy to claim the moral high ground when you don't define it, meaning where are you drawing the line? If I lose a leg in an accident and some scientists (plus doctors) can make a clone of my leg and my leg only to reattach it on my body is that moral or amoral? If yes then what about the complete lower body? If yes what about everything below the neck?

I think you are being silly.

What's moral or amoral is dependant on whatever he is feeling at the moment. I very much doubt he has defined it.