= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
SilasBarta comments on On the unpopularity of cryonics: life sucks, but at least then you die - 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 (465)
Rephrasing it as my favorite argument...
"Hey, what's that dorky necklace you're wearing?"
Oh, this? Well, you see, it turned out I was born with a fatal disease, and this is my best shot at overcoming it.
"That necklace will arrest the progress of a fatal disease?"
Yes, definitely, if a few plausible assumptions turn out right.
"How much did the necklace cost?"
Oh, about $28,000.
"And what disease is this that you can somehow fight with a $28,000 necklace?"
Mortality.
"But ... but ... that's not a disease!!!"
Looks like someone gets tripped up by definitions a little too easily...
Your line "Yes, definitely, if a few plausible assumptions turn out right. " is where most people will be put off.
It strikes of dishonesty, presumably to yourself. You're saying "definitely" and then clarifying that's it not actually definite. Which indicates that you're not being honest, you're trying to give an incorrect impression. At which point, your idea of what is plausible becomes entirely untrustworthy.
Which for a person desperate to find a way to overcome a fatal disease is commonplace.
I agree with what you say, but the rest of the discussion could go essentially unchanged if the line
were replaced with
"Perhaps, my best estimate of the odds are 1% or so"
(which would be my response in an analogous discussion)
I think that what seems to me to be the main point of the dialog,
is fairly insensitive to a wide range of possible odds for cryonics working.