X-Message-Number: 13350
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 22:11:17 -0700
From: Kitty Antonik-Raastad <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #13342 Biased viewpoints and guru supporting
References: <> <>

You sure are hot tonight!

Paul Wakfer wrote:

> > Message #13342
> > From: "George Smith" <>
> > References: <>
> > Subject: A few clarifications and observations respectully submitted
> > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:37:28 -0800
> >
> > Clarifications and observations interspersed below:
> >
> > In Message #13336 Paul Wakfer wrote on the subject:Re: CryoNet #13305 sound
> > bites
> >
> > >
> > > > Message #13305
> > > > From: 
> > > > Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 21:18:02 EST
> > > > Subject: sound bites
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > >
> > > Robert Ettinger pushed the following "viewpoint as 'the' key to
> > > life".
> > >
> > > > we can say some relevant things with
> > > > considerable confidence:
> > > > -----
> > > > If you don't try, you are less likely to succeed.
> > >
> > > This is a mere tautology
> >
> > Yet the tautology does describe a relevant truth we can state with
> > "considerable confidence".


 I could use some logic lessons; ie what is "tautology".  I was too tired to 
 remember to ask this before.

>
>
> So does "If you try, then you are more likely to succeed",
> or "If you do not succeed, then you may not have tried".
> So what?


I don't follow you on this one.  If someone does not try, how can they ever 
succeed?

>
>
> > > > For the optimists to be right, only one approach need work. For the
> > > > pessimists to be right, every approach must fail.
> > >
> > > For cryonics to succeed, every individual part of a series of highly
> > complex processes must work
> > > correctly. For cryonics to fail, only one part of one of those highly
> > complex processes needs to
> > > fail.
> >

> > This is conjecture stated as fact.   It is actually only a personal opinion.
>
> No. As stated, and lacking other conditions, it *is* a fact.
>
> > For example, there seem to be non-linear patterns with redundancies which
> > work despite failures.  A launched missile is over 99% of the time off
> > target but is corrects its trajectory as it goes.
>

> The "mid-course" corrections were already included as part of the "series of 
highly complex processes".
>
> > The human body is constantly "failing" as cells die.  Yet we generally
> > continue breathing for quite a few years - another example of non-linear
> > patterns with redundancies as cells continue to reproduce and replace the
> > failures in the highly complex process we call the human body.
>

> They are only "local" failures. The operation of the human body is a "series 
of highly complex

> processes" which have been organized and developed by evolution over billions 
of years. Those processes

> are only acutely successful at fixing local failures. In time they fail to 
prevent the chronic, global
> decline and disintegration of the system.
>

> The goal of life-extension sciences is to modify the body's homeostatic 
processes, either internally,

> externally, or through migration to new hardware, in order to prevent the 
chronic, global failure of the

> hardware which is the mind's container, processor, and interface to external 
reality.
>

> The goal of cryonics is to capture the state of the mind with as high fidelity
as possible and to store

> it until recovery, and life-extension sciences have the ability to restore it 
to full function in
> hardware capable of chronic homeostasis.
>
> > > > In the sweep of history, the can-do surprises have overwhelmed the
> > can't-do
> > > > surprises.
> > >
> > > Nonsense! This totally ignores the myriad of inventions, processes,
> > businesses, discoveries,
> > > etc. which are never amount to anything and are, thus, never heard of and
> > certainly not recorded

> > > by history. In science for example, negative results are seldom published.
> > >
> >
> > The fact that these unknowns never amounted to anything is why they are
> > overwhelmed by those that have.
>

> Again you have missed the point. The number of unknown failures is vastly more
than the number of
> failures which were noted as "surprises".

> It is only the *noted* failures which were overwhelmed by the successes. This 
is merely a result of the

> "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again!" principle being intentionally
applied to highly

> important goals. It says nothing about lessor, or largely unpublicized goals 
which might have lead to

> highly important ones if they had succeeded, but about which we know little or
nothing simply because

> the whole idea was a non-starter for one reason or another. It is possible 
that reversible suspended
> animation by means of vitrification may become such a lost failure.

> For example, there are multiple ways to achieve space travel which have never 
been tried. It is entirely

> possible that if we had taken the path to try one such many decades ago, we 
might now be much further

> into space than we are. Similarly, if evolution had taken certain different 
pathways millions of years

> ago, there might now be a race of near-immortal, sentient creatures populating
this planet.
>
> > > Paul Wakfer
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > It is all too easy to proclaim our opinions as facts.
>

> With a biased viewpoint, it is all too easy to think that real facts are 
merely opinions and can somehow
> be invalidated by the force of one's mindset.
>

> > It is even easier to miss what someone says when it clashes with our present
> > beliefs.
>

> It is still easier again to support someone's utterings because of their 
"guru" status within a cult.
>
> > If you catch me doing either one in the future, please correct me as well.
>
> This message is notice that you have been "caught" and corrected.
>
> > George Smith
> > www.cryonics.org
>
> -- Paul --

The remaining above was well done.

Kitty

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13350