> "Spike Jones" wrote> What if the murder's *victim* received cryonic suspension?
> "J. R. Molloy" wrote: With or without their permission?
Altho no one should ever undergo cryonic suspension *against* their
will, in the case of a murder victim who never heard of the technique,
I would favor suspending the victim. My reasoning is this: I suspect
that when we freeze the piece of meat that is running one's mental
programs, that piece of meat will never be successfully thawed.
However, that piece of meat may eventually be raised to perhaps
-5C and read by nanobots into some sort of machine that will
simulate that program. It seems to me that under those circs,
we could figure out a way to control the pain.
Nowthen, it *is* a hell of a good question, however. There are
certain types of pain that will be difficult or perhaps impossible to
control. If I reanimate, I already know the very first thing I will do:
I will sit down and weep: for all the people that I have ever loved
and cared about, most of them will be lost forever. The heartache
that I will feel on that day is *nearly* enough to convince me that
I do not *want* to face it, even if I get eternal existence in return.
But I think that it will probably be a good trade-off, and so would
favor suspending a person whose will is unknown.
As it turns out, that was one of my biggest problems when I was
still a believer in Religion Inc: that waking up in heaven would be
the saddest experience imaginable, because of those who were
not there. Cryonic reanimation will likely be just as bad, if not
worse, for there are damn few cryonauts, far too few, and of
course I think the world of you who are, I hope we will be best
of friends, but honestly, you will never replace my grandfather,
and he is gone forever.
So, JR, do the murder victims get suspended against their will? No.
Do they get suspended if their will is unknown? Yes.
Should murderers get the chance to have cryonic suspension, even
if their victims are lost forever? I think they should, yes. I am a
reluctant proponent of capital punishment, but I do not propose
we deny the recipient last rites by the clergy of their choice, nor
do I propose denying them suspension if they want it. Certainly
I do not propose suspending the prisoner against the prisoner's will.
Furthermore, I suspect that the first successful cryonic reanimation
would be on an executed prisoner, for there you would have a
unique example of a corpsicle that was likely young and healthy
when she underwent the suspension, perhaps making the brain
configuration easier to read. What say ye? spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:16 MDT