ata comments on Should criminals be denied cryonics? - Less Wrong

2 Post author: venetian 23 December 2010 04:23AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (49)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ata 23 December 2010 05:22:42AM 7 points [-]

It would be interesting to see what would happen from a political standpoint if a death row inmate were to express a wish for cryonics. Has anyone tried sending literature on cryonics to condemned criminals?

That would indeed be interesting, particularly because it would be a good test of how seriously people take cryonics when they're not motivated to deny the possibility of its success (to explain why they don't want to sign up, or why it wouldn't have been any use in saving the life of a loved one, etc.) — we'd see how many of them seemed to be seriously worried about the death row convicts coming back someday.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 23 December 2010 05:56:15AM 3 points [-]

Note that from the point of view of deterrent it doesn't mater whether cryonics works or not as long as the criminal believes it will.

Comment author: ata 23 December 2010 06:15:12AM 3 points [-]

True... so anyone who really wants to increase the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent should be promoting atheism. :)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 23 December 2010 06:29:36AM 7 points [-]

Of course, it's even more effective to promote the belief that sinners will spend eternity burning in hell.

Comment author: [deleted] 25 December 2010 04:27:48PM 0 points [-]

Especially if one also promotes that those executed are instantly sinners.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 23 December 2010 06:19:23AM *  3 points [-]

Suppose you believe that final death is an appropriate punishment for someone's crime. You also believe cryonics has probability p of working, where p is too small for you to sign up for cryonics. Should you allow the prisoner to be frozen?

If cryonics doesn't work, it doesn't make a difference; and if cryonics does, you shouldn't. Thus there is no reason to allow the prisoner to sign up for cryonics.

Notice that this conclusion doesn't depend on the probability of cryonics working, or on how certain you are the prisoner is guilty, for any certainty sufficient to justify him being executed.

Comment author: wedrifid 23 December 2010 11:32:13AM *  1 point [-]

That would indeed be interesting, particularly because it would be a good test of how seriously people take cryonics when they're not motivated to deny the possibility of its success (to explain why they don't want to sign up, or why it wouldn't have been any use in saving the life of a loved one, etc.) — we'd see how many of them seemed to be seriously worried about the death row convicts coming back someday.

I think you have just suggested an excellent persuasion tactic. I can't think of a better way to convince people they want something than by having them see it as a privilege that a deplored group don't deserve.

Comment author: David_Gerard 04 January 2011 12:07:36PM -1 points [-]

And the important thing is the presupposition that this is a matter worth discussion in the public arena.