X-Message-Number: 1023
Date: 19 Jul 92 20:15:26 EDT
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: Re: cryonics: #1018 - #1020

Hi again, Steve:

Incidentally, this morning I tried to reach you for a quite different

But sorry, for what it's worth I think "deanimation" and the other cryonics
terminology remains needed. Perhaps I've been involved for too long, but
it just seems quite impossible to make our point without making the
distinctions these words make.

I DO want to say, though, the last thing we should do is simply use them
without defining them. The thing about using a special word is that it
fixes the idea much more firmly in the mind than to use an older, sloppy
word which could mean this, or could mean that, or could mean many other
things. That's why "nanotechnology" is so good: anyone who knew
biochemistry would be aware of nanotechnology, but all the implications
don't become so clear without the name.
PS: and please phone about the other matter.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1023