X-Message-Number: 11470
From: "Scott Badger" <>
References: <>
Subject: Leon Dean's Questions
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 10:19:22 -0600

Leon Dean writes:

[snip]

>Then, if the cyronics dream comes true, a person will be successfully
revived.

>What will happen to the general population when this happens?  We all know
that religion >is really all about fear of death.  With death not an option
all these religions will crumble >and people will not want to die any more,
they will want to be frozen and then become >immortal. So instead of a few
people being frozen each year, millions will be frozen each >year."

First, it is *highly* doubtful that religion is *all* about death anxiety.
Though I suspect that is part of the persuasive appeal, there are several
other reasons why religion has been a part of human social systems for so
long.  Consequently, it is *highly* doubtful that religious systems of
belief will all crumble when aging is conquered.  You also wrongly assume
(IMO) that death will no longer exist for anyone.  (see below)

>When the technology comes along that will enable these people to be revived
and >become immortal, we will have millions of normal low intelligence
shopkeepers, >thieves, ?muggers, killers, taxi-drivers etc, and we would
have them for ever.

I'm a bit dismayed to see you lump together shop-keepers, taxi-drivers, and
criminals and then charaterize them all as having low intelligence.  Even if
this were true, what makes you think that they won't learn and grow and
develop as time passes?  I don't completely andorse Maslow's theories, but I
pretty much accept his suggestion that people are eventually inclined to
seek higher states of being if they've satisfied lower level needs and they
have the means to do so.

>How could we punish a killer?  What's 25 years to an immortal? Should we
kill them?  >Would the people who read this what to deny someone something
that we want so badly, >life.  So what would we do?

What's 25 years to an Immortal?  Well, it's still 25 years of subjective
time.  It's not going to go by any faster just because you live longer.  But
would we sentence anyone to life imprisonment?  Hmmm.

>We would have a static population.  No one would be born and no one would
die.  I am a >great believer of humanity and have faith in what we could
become, but at the moment we >suck!  We wage war, we kill each other -
thousands of times each day.  We rape people, >we steal, we waste the vast
majority of our lives on drinking and fighting, talking about >sport and
sleeping.  We annihilate hundreds of other species and are doing out best to
>destroy the very planet we are on.  As a species we are
evil....................at the moment.

I don't believe the population will become static.  A percentage of the
population will die by accident and be irretrievable.  Another percentage of
the population will choose to die.  They may believe it the *natural* thing
to do (some religions may form or adapt to promote this view), or they may
simply tire or life, or they may believe that the afterlife offers them
greater growth potential than life on Earth.  Besides, we will almost
certainly find a way to expand into space and explore and populate the
galaxy.  It's too dangerous for all of us to be here on one planet.  The
species is too vulnerable.

And as for your conclusion that we are an evil species. . . C'mon, humans do
naughty things, they do nice things, they waste time, they work hard,
they're clumsy, they're graceful, they stumble, they get up, they move on.
Yes we're making mistakes.  We'll make many more.  That's how we learn.  Did
you imagine that there weren't supposed to be any mistakes?

>I sure many of you read science-fiction.  The stories of us evolving into
something >greater than what we are, of turning into beings that are the
essence of humanity, its >creativity, its wonder, but this will be
impossible if we all live forever.  We could be a static >population of
imbeciles, tearing ourselves apart, dreaming of what we could have >become.

Boy, you have a dark vision.  You seem to be infected with a popular meme:
"The cycle of birth and death is the source of human progress".  This is
forgivable.  We see humans in their early years as idealistic, creative, and
energetic - learning and contributing so much - - - then they grow old and
seem to be less idealistic, creative, and energetic, and often contribute
less (with notable exceptions such as Robert Ettinger).  But what would
happen if we remained young, and our bodies were strong and healthy?  What
would happen if you could continually build upon the knowledge and the
skills you've developed instead of passing on just a small percentage of
your knowledge to the next generation before you die?  Wouldn't we proress
even faster?  I strongly suspect that the relationship between human
progress and the cycle of birth and death may be best described currently as
correlative but not causal.  This correlation will fade once aging is
conquered.

>Of course, after writing all of this, I will probably be frozen. as I am
scared of death.

There really are lots of other reasons to sign up.

Seek them out.

Then, as R. Ettinger would say, "Choose life!".

Best regards,

Scott Badger

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11470