I'm a bit lost as well. I feel like he's assuming some context we're all already aware of.

This tweet was inspired by someone telling me that cloning a deceased pet was Elon Muskian.

Thank you for providing context. Without it, it comes off as an odd and mystifying thing to say. I agree that it sounds like something Musk would do if he was capable of feeling affection for other creatures. I disagree that it's "immoral" or "repugnant", that is a harsh view.

Mileian. Our dumbass president cloned his dog (and he think that his dog is a reencarnation of a dog he met in other life when they both were gladiators in the colosseum)

But if you take every grieving pet owner who does it and assume they are like him, it’s not going to make things better!

i'm not quite sure how to feel about cloning pets yet. But you gotta admit that this case is the worst posterboy you could imagine...

One would be better to call it unrealistically sentimental. Musk has a ton of other baggage in addition to his self worshiping genetic mania. Pet clones are not necessarily pet duplicates, because gestation factors apply to the zygote. E.g., patch layout will almost surely not be duplicated.

Are you familiar with Milei's clonned dogs story? And his own "baggage"?

gladiators had dogs?

No, and the market doesn't regulate itself. But that's what he believes...

HAAAANK You can’t just say Kumbaya shit in the middle of a fascist takeover HAAAANK

I don’t think cloning a deceased pet is good, but I feel like ascribing morality and ideology to humans being weird about their pets is a mistake!

It's worse than "not good." You're praising it with faint damnation, bro. Wasting THOUSANDS OF TIMES the resources that you would spend on rescuing a shelter pet, while still leaving the shelter pet to be euthanized? THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING A MORALLY DEFUNCT BILLIONAIRE WOULD DO. Apt analogy.

We should clone Hank Green so that crashcourse never ends

Ok it might be a stretch to claim that all or most such behaviour comes from a place of ideology. But I do think such trends are driven and normalised by a certain ideological hedonism (read: billionaires), and the rest of us get sucked in them, forget to ask ourselves what we're doing and should we

I think this is what he means. “Ideological hedonism” as the bar for repugnant will make you very unhappy and judgmental of a very large portion of people

someone's actions*, makes them*,

I hate that you cannot correct your typos on this app. their* actions

Unless of course said person is defined by mostly terrible actions one after another

Though that is also assuming that disagreeing with someone actions makes utterly repugnant to me

True! For me it’s been easier to just stop thinking that way in the first place, but if you’re better at separating it that way than me, good on you

I mean being able to live life and not go crazy kinda takes both IMO: trying to maintain some sort of conscience and moral code but also abstaining from judging others & keeping in mind they're probsbly as good ss or better person than you (now unless we're talking an actual villainous personality)

That's more of a general cultural shift due to medicine. Medicine is great and is getting better, and I won't say people were moral back when death was much more common. But we have a culture that sees death as a taboo subject to even think about. It's something we hide in the hospice.

Our relationship with death shifted so rapidly in the past decades, that many first experience grief through a pet dying, after being around for most of your childhood. To believe a doctor, somewhere, can fix it, is natural all things considered. It's *usually* true.

At the same time that "superficial shell" is another living being, with their own self and experiences, which we ignore because they superficially resemble our lost loved one

In a way the fact we then cling on to a "replica" of our loved one absurdly leads to forgetting them and showing how easily they're replaceable to us by a superficial shell.

I'm not saying it's not human for some part of you to think that science could bring back your dog or even your son child or your parent by cloning "a duplicate" of them. It's just that, akin to your first response, we've seem to forgot the ability to accept loss and let go.

While I certainly don’t think cloning pets rises to the level of Elon Muskery, I hope you’re not suggesting that science should indulge such weird behavior

Okay see the context of "people's grief about their pets" and not "vague political sounding lecture" completely changes the whole Vibe of your post.

There is a certain Magic Reptilian that has made quite the bit out of cloning their pet.

You need to specify these things please. As I read this my mind went "please no. Please no. Please don't tell me hank green is defending bigotry. Cause that's kinda how it read, and in a world where people we thought were good are revealed to be evil all the time, it's scary.

He doesn’t defend bigotry, but often uses it, whether intentionally or not, to make points. He never respond to people calling out his white liberal man takes that involve eschewing rights for certain groups. Hell, he couldn’t be bothered to correct misinfo in a video about trans folks for months

This feels like a humorously odd and specific, very minute instance to prompt an existential ethics discussion with. 😂

Sounds a tad gratuitously dramatic of them.

I think ruining a democracy is more Elon Muskian than a cloned pet but I stand corrected.

yeah that's what im wondering too. when people's "blandness" stops them from working to prevent fascism... actually they are to blame and bad!