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.

hyporational comments on Open Thread, November 15-22, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: drethelin 16 November 2013 01:36AM

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

Comments (257)

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

Comment author: hyporational 18 November 2013 06:25:33AM 3 points [-]

That could be because they believe that everyone will be resurrected.

Assuming your closure hypothesis is true, I think this is it. With cryonics, not only do you have to worry about the low chance of getting resurrected, but you also have to worry about the state of the cryonics facilities that store your loved ones while you're still alive.

Comment author: ygert 18 November 2013 12:25:14PM *  0 points [-]

That could be because they believe that everyone will be resurrected.

Assuming your closure hypothesis is true, I think this is it. With cryonics, not only do you have to worry about the low chance of getting resurrected, but you also have to worry about the state of the cryonics facilities that store your loved ones while you're still alive.

I doubt this is the case. Were this the case, wouldn't the solution be obvious? Why are they objecting to cryonics, rather than also signing up themselves, if they agree that cryonics is plausible and fear their loved one being resurrected and them not?

Comment author: hyporational 18 November 2013 12:48:10PM 3 points [-]

I don't understand your objection. I think you misread the previous two comments.