Re: Who Should Live?

J. R. Molloy (
Wed, 17 Mar 1999 22:50:02 -0800

Brian D. Williams wrote,
>Cryonics is between individuals and the companies involved, no
>public resources are "drained". In fact the spinoffs from cryonics
>research including such things as organ freezing will save
>hundred's of thousand's of people per year.

Perhaps so, we shall see.

As this relates to the question of Who Should Live?, or Who Would You Like To See Embrace Cryonics?, it appears mostly people who have access to cryonic technology, since cryonics doesn't receive any public resources or funding to offer the service to Third World people. In future, conceivably, cryonicists might recruit human volunteers, but with several species on the endangered list, cryonicists might first try a giant Panda, an endangered tiger species, or a mountain gorilla? If so, then I'd include a gorilla or two in my "list of five" to embrace cryonics.

>You have the same fears, based on the same lack of knowledge, as
>the general populace when it comes to cloning. Cloning only
>produces a biologically very similar organism, (not an exact
>duplicate) no memories are involved. The clone of a genius will not
>necessarily be a genius, in fact not even likely.

I don't think so, because I really, really like the idea of cloning, and hope to see a human clone within the next few years. Until a few people actually get cloned, we can only speculate and conjecture about what attributes they may or may not have in common with their originals.

>We don't seek to deny the creation of others, just the preservation
>of ourselves.

The ultimate entropy: Perfect preservation of perfect equilibrium, IOW, death.
In diametric opposition to entropy, life means constant change and renewal, not preservation.

>We are not doing this for the world, but for ourselves. I don't
>think any of us hoping to be revived would mind having our
>intelligence increased by future tech. In fact I expect it.

Future technologists may well consider the motives of cryonicists when they determine Who Should Live. Perhaps they will decide to revive a few humans first to test the new technology before moving to more important species. Great disappointments depend on great expectations. I suspect the next ten or fifteen years will determine whether humans evolve to Type I civilization (by Michio Kaku's system) or not. Probably not, because although science may indeed provide the tools to reach Type I status, humans apparently lack adequate motivation to use them, as any poll of the general public reveals.

>Cryonics is not life denying, in fact I think it's the most life
>affirming, positive outlook of the future there is.

To each his own. I'll put my money (okay, five bucks, hehe) on cloning blended with genetically modified (intelligence, immune system, sensory perception augmented) humans and combinatorial chemistry. But not for myself understand, because first I want everyone else to have a chance to become as talented and gifted as me. <supercilious smirk>


--J. R.