You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Bugmaster comments on First, they must be convinced to play the game - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: lavalamp 09 October 2011 04:52PM

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

Comments (56)

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

Comment author: Bugmaster 10 October 2011 07:30:36PM 2 points [-]

Cryonics isn't trying to escape death or heaven. It's just the best darn technological form of burial that exists.

I've never been a Christian, so I could be wrong about this, but many Christians I'd met would disagree with you. They believe that if they die -- permanently, without hope of revival -- while being "right with God" (the precise meaning of which varies by sect), then they get to go to Heaven. Going to Heaven has infinite positive utility.

Desecration issues aside, if what the cryonics companies are selling is the real deal, then signing up for cryonics involves being bound to your physical body for a long time, potentially forever. Sure, you might be awakened at some distant point in the future, and there is some positive utility to living more days on this Earth, but this utility is finite.

Thus, the Christian has a choice between going to Heaven ASAP, and attaining an infinite positive utility; or signing up for cryonics and either attaining a finite positive utility (if it works), or keeping his utility unchanged for a long time (if it doesn't). Therefore, it would be irrational for the Christian to sign up for cryonics.

Comment author: Vaniver 11 October 2011 12:58:57PM 0 points [-]

They believe that if they die -- permanently, without hope of revival -- while being "right with God" (the precise meaning of which varies by sect), then they get to go to Heaven.

I don't see where the "permanently" part comes from. It may be the layman's interpretation, but I don't think it's Biblically motivated.