= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MartinB comments on The Threat of Cryonics - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (212)
Yes, I think that this is quite possible. However, the reasons are, as you say below ‘the weaknesses and diseases of old age’, so they're not really relevant.
I can also easily imagine that I will never want to die. I can easily imagine that, as health care improves ahead of my aging, many of the people who are alive now will live forever, and I will also. That would be fine.
But cryonics is different. Here, you are asking me to take a break of time during which technology advances far beyond what it is today, not to live into the future one day at a time. That does not interest me.
I'm not even interested in being revived from a coma after several years, using only contemporary technology. Certainly I don't consider it worth the expense. In fact, the main reason that I don't sign up for DNR now is that I know some people who would suffer if I did not at least outlive them (plus the bother of signing up, although at least it costs nothing).
But I think that your question may be a good one to ask other people who have come to terms with death and thereby find cryonics unappealing. Ask when, after a short or long period of apparent death, they would not want to be revived. For me, that time comes when the people that I care about are no longer around and the things that interest me are no longer current. But I can imagine that some other people would realise that the answer is never and decide to sign up.
Thank you for answering.
I find it strange how society at large frowns upon cryo, while also not doing a serious effort to prolong the healthy lifespan (wallbangerific). But on the other side frowns upon suicide.
I also usually avoid the topic due to its iffyness, and i am not signed up myself yet, so its basically armchairing anyway.
I think Matt got a point. And of course if you go into the search for your real reasons all kinds of bad things might happen for you.
But what jumped me, was that a long lifespan is fine, while a long lifespan with a coma/pause in the middle is not. I dont get that.
Of course cryo people would love to take their loved ones with them, and are horrified when they ignore the chance.
I agree with that! I'm interested in the work by Aubrey de Grey. It's not useful to me now, but I predict that someday it will be.
Well, I don't suppose that there are many people who feel that way. If you can get across the idea that cryonics is a way of turning one's death into a very long coma, then that may help make it more attractive.
But I get up in the morning because there are things that I left unfinished the day before. By the time that I am revived from cryonics, they will all be finished.
If my loved ones signed up for cryonics, that would be reason enough for me.
Yes. Exploring how people would feel about a very long coma could be a good way of exploring how they feel about cryonics-minus-the-creep-factor. In other words, if they didn't have the psychological obstacles centered around cryonics, how would they really feel about it?
I am starting to wonder if there needs to be more of a recognized social niche for cryo supporters who aren't signed up themselves (or whose arrangements simply are not public).
My niche is young people with little money living in Europe. To sign up I need to a) make money - which will happen soon b) figure out how the necessary arrangements for germany regarding transport, legal and what not, c) get the paperwork. After the writing the earlier comment I got another reality-shock about how stupid it is that society at large doesnt jump on the longevity issue. Way worse than smoking....