This is also an argument against going to movies, buying coffee, owning a car, or having a child. In fact, this is an argument against doing anything beyond living at the absolute minimum threshold of life, while donating the rest of your income to charity.
How can you say it's moral to value your own comfort as being worth more than 100-1000 other humans? They just did worse at the birth lottery, right?
It's not really an argument against those other things, although I do indeed try to avoid some luxuries, or to match the amount I spend on them with a donation to an effective aid organization.
What I think you've missed is that many of the items you mention are essential for me to continue having and being motivated in a job that pays me well -- well enough to make donations to aid organizations that accomplish far more than I could if I just took a plane to a place of extreme poverty and attempted to help using my own skills directly.
If there's a better way to help alleviate poverty than donating a percentage of my developed-world salary to effective charities every year, I haven't found it yet.
One can expect to live a life at least 100-1000 times longer than those other poor people, or live a life that has at least 100-1000 times as much positive utility, as well as the points in the other comments.
Although this argument is a decent one for some people, it's much more often the product of motivated cognition than carefully looking at the issues, so I did not include it in the post.
Thanks for the reply.
One can expect to live a life at least 100-1000 times longer than those other poor people
.. when you say "can expect to", what do you mean? Do you mean "it is extremely likely that.."? That's the problem. If it was a sure deal, it would be logical to spend the money on it -- but in fact it's extremely uncertain, whereas the $50 being asked for by a group like Aravind Eye Hospital to directly fund a cataract operation is (close to) relieving significant suffering with a probability of 1.
like this: I value my subjective experience more than even hundreds of thousands of other similar-but-not-me subjective experiences.
additionally, your argument applies to generic goods you choose over saving people, not just cryonics.
Well, sure, but I asked how it could be moral, not how you can evade the question by deciding that you don't have any responsibilities to anyone.
Hi, I'm pretty new here too. I hope I'm not repeating an old argument, but suspect I am; feel free to answer with a pointer instead of a direct rebuttal.
I'm surprised that no-one's mentioned the cost of cryonics in relation to the reduction in net human suffering that could come from spending the money on poverty relief instead. For (say) USD $50k, I could save around 100 lives ($500/life is a current rough estimate at lifesaving aid for people in extreme poverty), or could dramatically increase the quality of life of 1000 people (for example, cataract operations to restore sight to a blind person are around $50).
How can we say it's moral to value such a long shot at elongating my own life as being worth more than 100-1000 lives of other humans who happened to do worse in the birth wealth lottery than I did?
The voice banking software I'm using is from the Speech Research Lab at the University of Delaware. They say they are in the process of commercializing it; hopefully it will still be free to the disabled. Probably not looking for donations though.
Another interesting communications assistance project is Dasher. They have a Java applet demo as well as programs for PC and smart phones. It does predictive input designed to maximize effective bandwidth. A little confusing at first but supposedly after some practice you can type fast with only minimal use of the controls. I say supposedly because I haven't used it much, it's not clear what I might be controlling it with. I should practice with it some more, it sounds likely to be part of an overall solution. Would be cool to control it with BCI, sit back and just think to type your messages.
Everybody with ALS talks about how terrible it is, all the things you can't do any more. But nobody seems to notice that there are all these things you get to do that you've never done before. I've never used a power wheelchair. I've never controlled a computer with my eyes. I've never had a voice synthesizer trained to mimic my natural voice. If I told people on the ALS forums that I was looking forward to some of this, they'd think I was crazy. Maybe people here will understand.
Hi Hal. I'm sorry to hear of your diagnosis.
I spent two years as the maintainer of Dasher, and would be happy to answer questions on it. It's able to use any single analog muscle for control, as a worst case (and a two-axis precise device like a mouse as a best case). There's a video of using Dasher with one axis here -- breath control, as measured by diaphragm circumference:
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/dasher/movies/BreathDasher.mpg
and there are videos using other muscles (head tracking, eye tracking) here:
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/dasher/Demonstrations.html
Head-mice (you put an infra-red dot on some glasses or your forehead and then just move your head to move a pointer) are a common and cheap input method; they cost less than $100, and Dasher's very accepting of noisy input; if you oversteer in one direction you can just compensate later.
You're not the first person to consider Dasher with BCI -- here's a slightly outdated summary:
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/saw27/dasher/bci/
All the best,
View more: Prev
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Ah, I see. So when you spend money on yourself, it's just to motivate yourself for more charitable labor. But when those weird cryonauts spend money on themselves, they're being selfish!
How wonderful to be you.
No, I'm arguing that it would be selfish for me to spend money on myself, if that money was on cryonics, where selfishness is defined as (a) spending an amount of money that could relieve a great amount of suffering, (b) on something that doesn't relate to retaining my ability to get a paycheck.
One weakness in this argument is that there could be a person who is so fearful of death that they can't live effectively without the comfort that signing up for cryonics gives them. In that circumstance, I couldn't use this criticism.