X-Message-Number: 16995
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:16:27 -0700
From: Olaf Henny <>
Subject: Mike Perry; On Preserving Photos and Recordings
References: <>

>I think material containing information about a person is worth preserving
>even in cases where it is obviously compromised, as after long burial. But
>in such cases a cell sample may be as good as anything more--supplemented,
>as feasible, with other items such as documents, photos, tapes--call them
>*records* to distinguish from biological remains. There are certain, rather
>involved reasons why I think this could be especially important, as I argue
>in my book. It would, in my view, lead to genuine betterment in an
>afterlife that I see eventually coming into being in any case. But I doubt
>if many of those who call in for some deceased and possibly long-buried
>relative will care to study these arguments or be much inspired by them,
>especially in their current state of grief.

While I believe, that there is a point in preserving recordings,
photos etc. in order to augment a memory, which might be left
"spotty" after revival, I see no benefit in keeping such records,
when only the DNA is preserved.  If the purpose is to create a
clone, or several, of myself, then preserving genetic material may
be of some use.  However the preserved recordings and photos will
do little to integrate themselves into the consciousness of a
clone, growing up in an entirely different environment than the
original, beyond being interesting historic information.

We have seen in science many  miracles  happen, even though we
did not perceive them as such, because they happened in small
enough steps to acclimatize us to their "wonders", while they
were emerging.  I say therefore with a faint whisper of
reservation, that Elizabeth's father can at best be cloned, never
revived.

Although I am now, as many here assert, a different person than I
was as a child, there is a continuity of evolvement and all I
have ever done, said and experienced has contributed to define
the person that I am now.

All that is no longer there in my clone.  He does not have the
same experiences and memories, but his own and will therefore be
a different person. If I had been born  300 years ago in the South,
who knows, I might have been either a slave or a slave master,
completely convinced of the righteousness of my position.  Had
you *then* taken a sample of my genetic material and raised me as
and when I was in fact raised, I would probably be thoroughly
disgusted and embarrassed about my former self, unless, of course
I would hopefully have had the wisdom to realise, that the former
was just a "child of his time".

This is something we and those who revive us will have to deal
with: different mores in different times.  While we may be
appalled about colonialism, systematic subversion of other
cultures, racism and other prejudices of only 100 years ago.
People living in those times, when the mere display [gasp] of a
bare ankle was akin to exhibitionism, would be absolutely aghast
at our exhibits of public nudity, eroticism, sexual behavior etc.
and would consider it a sure sign of our surrender to the devil.

Best,
Olaf

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16995