What if they can’t communicate well? Or are genetically unable to read?
It’s not like they’d be able to hold a job or achieve any sort of life goal if it turns out that they’re mentally much less suited for our society.
There are humans who fall into that category. But humans are masters of communication. If the Neanderthal can’t vocalize, we’ll teach him/her sign language (we know that chimps and gorillas can learn some sign language). If he/she can’t read, well neither can lots of people.
John Mace, I would suggest that your willingness to extend how happy we can apparently make dogs and cats bred for thousands of years to be pets to be as pets as justification that a creature of similar but in undetermined ways different cognitive and socioemotional capacities to our own, adapted for a completely different world, will be content, is … with little foundation. Even our not as close relative, the chimpanzee, is intelligent but different enough to not do so well under those circumstances. You may want to watch Project Nim. How much more so a our closer relative, likely as intelligent as we are, possibly more so in some narrow ways and less so in others, but with unknown and unpredictable cognitive and socioemotional differences and an unknown developmental pattern?
But you have the hubris to declare that we can provide in a such a way that this person would be content, since we have content dogs and cats amongst us.
No. This is creating a human life and subjecting it to a high degree of risk of misery to satisfy our curiosity.
As to immunity … immunity is not genetic, at least not adaptive immunity which is the sort we’d be caring about. There are antibodies passively acquired from the mother in utero. There are some passively acquired antibodies from breast milk as well. There are innate mechanisms that are nonspecific and that should work the same now as then. There are protective effects from being colonized after birth with Mom’s flora (especially but not exclusively gut colonization). Otherwise we develop protection with exposures.
There is no reason to believe that a Neandertal baby would have any greater risk than a hss baby conceived in the same manner. And no risks of contagion that they’d represent.
But this is a non-issue. If he’s human, then it is capable of expressing its displeasure and of at least trying to kill itself. If it isn’t, then it is an animal, and euthanasia makes sense if we can detect actual suffering.
And, unless the cloning is imperfect, I see no reason to presuppose suffering of the kind that can’t be detected. No animal is routinely born suffering. We have a basic system that tries to make us happy in whatever circumstances we are in. Depression and the like are when that system breaks down.
Since this is a funded experiment, there’s no reason to presuppose any of the actual suffering that happens with humans. The creature is not going to be abused and is going to have food and shelter. If we see something that he appears to need, we can get it for him.
Companionship is about the only thing I can think he might need that we couldn’t give, but I don’t really see not being able to mate as suffering. It isn’t in any other animal, including ourselves. There’s no reason to presuppose it would be an issue here.
Plus, you could in fact clone a mate if you had to.
We know that Neanderthals mated with humans in the past. I don’t think our celebrity Neanderthal (or the small group we bring about) will have trouble meeting people.
Misery? Provide him with a reliable supply of sandwiches and clean prostitutes. Shell out for premium HD cable too.
That’s covered as a contingency in the research grant.
DSeid: I’ve seen Project Nim, but I really didn’t need to because I’ve known about his story for years. First of all, the family raising him had zero training with chimps or with research at all. And he was more of a problem to the family trying to raise him that the other way around. His real demise came when the money ran out, and he had to be taken to facility where he wasn’t given anywhere near the stimulation had had in the family. As already noted in this thread, there are any number of chimps or gorillas living with humans in some way or another that appear to be perfectly happy.
Neanderthals had fire, clothing, advanced tools, and buried their dead. I thought the idea that they were some crazed chimpanzee or gorilla type creature went the way of the Edsel.
They made spears, so surely they weren’t chimp level. But they still might have profound disabilities when it comes to working in our society. Until we know, I’d say it’s not right to create one.
You laugh it off as a line in the grant, but you’d be running the risk of making a human being who is perhaps smart and ambitious, but setting him up to live as a custodial oddity.
I doubt you’d be okay living in a halfway house for the entirety your life because some scientist decided it would be cool to clone you. Suppose you want to live on your own? Sorry Iceman, because you genetically can’t understand numbers, you’re fucked.
Yeah, some people are broken. We don’t make those on purpose.
Who is claiming they would be crazed chimpanzee or gorilla like creatures? The unjustified claim I think is that intelligent must equal intelligent just like us. The odds are that a Neandertal would have a cognitive tool set quite different from ours (possibly superior in some ways) and socioemotional wiring a bit alien to ours as well. I think there is little respect being given for the likely unique desires and needs that another sentient creature with an brain somewhat alien to our own would likely have and an overestimation of our ability to be able to both predict it and deduce it along the way, let alone to have any understanding of how that set predispositions and abilities will interact and respond to any environment we might present to him/her.
Let’s face it, our track record for even understanding and interacting with the mindsets of others of alien cultures of the same species is poor enough.
But there’s no reason to believe they will be “broken”. They made complex tools and thrived in a harsh environment. As long as they’re raised in modern society, surviving and thriving will be a piece of cake. We share a common ancestor from only a few hundred thousand years ago (and we’ve intermixed at least a bit since). I really don’t think we would be all that different. They may not be as adept with vocal language as we are, but we’ll be able to bridge that gap. They may not be as adept with numbers or letters, but they can find things to do that don’t require that.
You are creating a human–pretty nearly anatomically modern–who is a laboratory captive. Perhaps literally captive–too dangerous to allow to walk around unfettered. If not that dangerous, than likely at least captive to the extent of requiring 24/7 handlers.
If your ethics allows you to create a human being with those constraints, then it’s consistent to allow creation of a Neandertal with the same constraints. If you wouldn’t deliberately create such a human, you should not create a Neandertal. There is not very fundamental agreement on how ethical it is to even keep chimps captive, and this being would function on a much higher plane; probably able to understand its captive-ness. Should it end up being wretched, I could not personally euthanize it, and so I don’t want to create it in the first place.
This is not a non-sapiens animal. I do not share your confidence you will make it happy, although I agree with other posters that (if it’s a male), plenty of sapiens sapiens will come forward to relieve its sexual urges. (That may say something about us. 
)
I don’t doubt that they can be kept comfortably. If it turns out that they can’t function, they won’t be able to move freely in our society. They’d be prisoners.
Maybe they’d have an English butler that would follow them around and pay for things in restaurants and handle whatever they aren’t set up for. But that grant better be pretty generous to afford 24 hour personal assistant coverage.
Uh, have I mentioned that I’m a cloned Neanderthal? Ladies, please PM me for scheduling info.
Jeeves and the Caveman. I would definitely watch that.
Caveman: “Urrgh… mrooo… ukahhh, nahh-loo!”
Jeeves: “The master finds you pleasing to look at. He would like to know how many bison your father is asking for you.”
I’ve not made that claim.
Odds are that his cognitive tool set would be somewhat different. Odds are we could learn to understand, at least enough to effectively deal with, what difference do exist. We’re able to do that with other species far more different than any Neanderthal is going to be.
It’s certainly true that, until recently, our track record was dismal, but we’ve learned a lot in the last few decades. Not the least of which is that it’s surprising how creatures which are seemingly inclined to clash with each other can live quite symbiotically as long as they are socialized together.
I have to admit that, although my personal ethics won’t let me create a Neandertal, I’d be first in line to buy tickets to see the one John Mace creates. Way cool, if not exactly ethical.
Step right up, folks.
Get yer tickets here to see a GEN-U-INE Neanderthal Cave Man.
That’s right, ladies and gents, an ancient being brought back to life by the miracle of Science!
He’s brutish. He’s primitive. He’s filled with raw, sexual energy.
Men, beware. He’ll kill you as soon as look as you.
And you ladies, don’t get close. He’ll club you over the head and drag you back to his lair for a fate worse than death!!
Step right up, folks!
We have no way of knowing if the brain of the Neanderthal is set up the same as the modern human brain. It’s not just a function of size. we have specialized parts of the brain for speech and cognitive thinking.