X-Message-Number: 17209
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:12:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Louis Epstein <>
Subject: Cryonet July 25-8
CryoNet - Wed 25 Jul 2001
-------------------------
#17084: Re: CryoNet #17067 - #17078 [Scott Badger]
>The cryonicists' goal of preserving personal identity is a point that has
>been eating at me lately. It is, of course, an extrapolation of our
>normal everyday need to maintain and preserve a coherent sense of self
>from one day into the next. And I think most of us think of our identities
>as comprised of two main factors (1) personality [i.e. behavioral
>dispositions derived from genetic and environmenal influences] and
>(2) our memories [understanding that a significant portion of those
>memories have been edited and altered over time].
>Since many of those on Cryonet also have transhumanist aspirations, the
>following problem is unavoidable.
[snip description of personality traits]
>BUT in the future ... as a ">H" , I would not want to be constrained by
>these kinds of predispositions. Let's say I'm an introvert by circumstance.
>Becoming a >H means transcending that predisposition if I find it helpful
>to engage in extroverted kinds of behaviors.
>So, how does one describe the personality of a >H since predispositioned
>behaviors have been eliminated? Instead only those behaviors which are most
>reasonable and in the enlightened self-interest of the >H will manifest.
>The upshot of this is that there will be much less variation in the
>behaviors of different >H's than we currently see among ourselves.
[snip some more elaboration on how this
envisioned future would blur people's
personalities and memories]
Well,I consider the variable H,though
its value is to be maximized,as an upper
bound,so I reject the idea of ">H"...
that which is not H is <H by definition.
But I think Badger is making an important
point here that one hopes will make at least
some think twice about blurring matters that
should be regarded as fixed.The assumption
that there is one "enlightened" way for people
to agree on also bears noting for good or ill
as contrasted with the diversity-worship
propounded in other contexts by members of the
same "movement".
>Only neo-luddites would hold on to their original identities, but who
>knows ... maybe there'll be a place for them to survive and/or thrive.
I don't consider myself a Luddite,but neither do
I embrace technology with uncritical worship.
And I do not define survival to include transmutation
into something wholly other than one's origin.
One defeats death by overcoming currents of change,
not floating away on them.
I am sure that I will not be alone in avoiding
alterations that the less critical might subject
themselves to.
#17085: Self worth, survival, motivation and other weird stuff about
identity. [George Smith]
>There is a version of English called "e-prime".
>The first person to draw this to my attention was Albert Ellis, creator
>of Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy (formerly RET). In brief, with
>e-prime you choose to delete the use of the verb "to be" in communication.
>Thus instead of saying "I AM angry", you are a little more accurate by
>stating "I FEEL anger".
>What is the difference? Identity and clarity.
I was first exposed to "E-prime" years
ago on the GEnie Religion and Ethics
RoundTable,and it utterly infuriated me.
It is the very enemy of clarity.
By omitting "to be" it makes statements
of fact about existence impossible.It
only permits perception rather than reality
to be alluded to.It is reminiscent of
Orwell's Newspeak in its effort to diminish
the range of thought.
#17086: the nature of self-worth regarding cryonics [john grigg]
>We need to let this person know that if they look back over time the
>compassion and charity of society has greatly increased. And with vastly
>superior technologies the people of the future will have both the desire AND
>power to reach out and get people to the level where they can thrive in a
>new world. This person needs to know that as a "living historical artifact"
>he/she will have great value to them and NOT be a social outcast or an
>animal in a zoo.
Again this presumes that the necessary advances
will not occur in the near future,as the time
has yet to come that the frozen cryopatients
represent any unique historical perspective.
I don't know what the median birthyear of the
typical hitherto-cryopreserved person is,but
I'm sure it's somewhere in the 20th century...
decades from being older than any living person.
And the person to whom cryonics is pitched will
be younger than that.(The earliest-born cryonics
patient was born after the current earliest-born
living person.Even assuming that the usual
suspendee is 80,that leaves us perhaps forty
years before there is no one left "animated" who
was born before 1920...with advances over the
next forty years,probably more than that).
#17090: File Sizes, Debunking of Claims of the Paranormal [Mike Perry]
>By the way, James, I really liked your debunking effort for the tiresome
>claims of consciousness during clinical death.
Of course,cryonics depends absolutely on the
possibility of consciousness *after* clinical death.
>True, we want to be open-minded, but extraordinary claims require
>extraordinary evidence. As yet, there is no such evidence (that I know of)
>for any paranormal effects whatever. (Any who disagree should contact CSICOP.)
That psychics are phony does not begin to
suggest that atheism is any less phony.
This determination to make sure the baby
gets heaved out with the bathwater is a
clear sticking point between me and CSICOP.
#17091: Re: Origins of Virtue [Lee Corbin]
>Robert Ettinger writes
>>First, evolutionary explanations are beside the point.
>I think that they are an indispensable guide, and also often strongly
>indicate what is credible (or unbelievable). As one example, one can
>demolish the idea that trees suffer when cut, by evolutionary arguments.
One can attack the argument,but not ensure
that one's opponents regard the attacks as
successful.
>>One can be misguided by traits acquired through evolutionay pressures,
>yes---like for some, a belief in God
Belief in God is a sign of rationality;
it's belief in religions that is a logical
failure.
CryoNet - Thu 26 Jul 2001
-------------------------
#17092: identity [Kennita Watson]
>Scott Badger wrote:
>> ...eventually, isn't it likely that we'll all have about 99% of the
>> same memories? So ... NOW who am I? ... and how do I differ from you?
>I don't consider memory sharing a problem. Recall that we
>share about 99% of our genes with gorillas, and there's no
>problem telling us apart. Besides, just because we all have
>the same info in our minds doesn't mean we all pay attention
>to the same parts of it.
But recall his point was that the
envisioned changes would lead to
sharing both outlooks and memories,
not just one of them...and memories
would likely help shape outlooks.
#17095: Pride goeth before... [Ettinger]
>Dr. Badger recalls some aspects of "identity" vs. growth. We aspire to
>become superhuman as well as immortal, and (with luck) we even anticipate a
>time when our future selves will have very little in common with our present
>selves, and may not even be interested in retaining memories of these
>ancient times.
In such an event,the original selves
can be said to have died,as in what
sense will they survive?
>There is also the question of the exeriencer vs. the experienced. I tend
>to suspect they ARE the same, or at any rate that the experience is more
>important than the substrate or carrier. (If a silicon brain could have
>your feelings, as well as your memories and pesonality etc.--which is not
>at all clear--would it not be another you, or another being essentially
>equivalent to you from the point of view of a third party?)
That depends on the views of the third
party regarding identity.I know that I
would not regard a computer simulation
of a person as being a person.
>We may have almost nothing in common with our distant-future selves, but
>we connect through a series of overlaps.
Our distant-future selves matter to our present
selves to the extent of the overlap.
>(You probably don't care much about the fates of your unborn
>great-great grandchildren, but you care about the closer generations,
>who in turn care about the later.)
Of course,an immortalized society will
have many more multi-generation families.
In time one may have occasion to see little
of one's great-grandchildren but be closer
to THEIR great-grandchildren...
#17097: Re: variation, self-esteem, and self-intertest [Scott Badger]
>First, I'd like to ammend my thoughts on the notion that >H will likely
>be less diverse than humans are now. That would only apply to those >H's
>that are in close enough proximity that they can freely exchnage
>their expereinces and information. Those >H's that head out into space
>in different directions will certainly experience radically more
>variation in terms of their identities compared to each others and to
>those left behind.
Another black mark against the ">H" concept
as far as I'm concerned...I consider maintaining
the unity of the species,for all eternity,to be
a critical obligation upon all of us.
What others may see as progress,I would see as
catastrophe.
>Let's try a new tack and dust off an
>old psychologist named Henry Murray who proposed:
>* Murray believed that human beings are capable of
>solving any problems they face
OK...I'd like to have a ship that can take me and three
million friends to the Centaurus A Galaxy and back,
before lunch tomorrow,and I'd like it to cost me less
than $5.95.
Who'll meet my specs?
#17099: Junk mail-------- help [david pizer]
>I get junk E-mail. I have asked the senders to remove me from their
>lists. Sometimes they do and sometimes they ignore my request. Also, the
>junk mailers must sell my name to other junk mailers because sometimes
>the same errors in a new mailer show up.
By asking to be removed,you help them create
a list they can sell of "fresh email addresses".
Never get spammail offering those?
#17100: Why? [Thomas R Mazanec]
(Hi,Tom,I remember your name from TSA-talk)
>There are thousands of millions of people in the world.
>Hundreds of millions of them live in the "developed regions".
>Millions of these are in the upper 1 percentile of IQ.
I've got my Intertel card myself...
>Thousands of people, at most, have signed up for cryonics.
>Why do 99.9% of the smart, educated, wealthy population
>have nothing to do with cryonics? They know of it...for a third
>of a century cryonics has been popularized...probably as many
>people have heard of it as have heard of flying saucers.
>Yet you can't get more than a minimum of people to sign up.
>Diagnose what is wrong, then prescribe how to cure this.
Like flying saucers,it's something much more
widely *known of* than *believed in*.(I dare
say more people believe that there have been
aliens visiting the Earth than believe that
frozen people can be reanimated).
As long as it is a very-long-odds gamble,
you are not going to see many people buying it.
Lottery tickets don't cost tens of thousands
of dollars.
#17102: Rational priorities [Mark Plus]
>These discussions about altruism, self-esteem, etc. are interesting. But
>what about some hard, cryonics-related news about progress towards ending
>the life-threatening emergency facing us all?
I expect if there were any,
it would be announced here.
But it's rare.
#17104: Transhuman Loss of Identity [Lee Corbin]
>Scott writes
>>Only neo-luddites would hold on to their original
>>identities, but who knows ... maybe there'll be a
>>place for them to survive and/or thrive.
>The solution that I have recommended (that I first placed in a LifeQuest
>science fiction story in thelate eighties is to get out of our heads the
>idea that we can only do one thing, or only be in one place, or only
>execute at a particular level of advancement.
On the contrary...letting go of that fact
is an evasion,not a solution.If you exist
*as an individual* then you MUST be in only
one place,etc.
A class of comparably-programmed clones are
not a single person.
>Provided the resources are available, I fully intend to run "earlier
>version" backups of myself, and make sure that they get plenty of run
>time, just as more advanced versions of myself will make sure that I
>get plenty of run time.
Who's making these decisions?
What if the "backups" and "versions" disagree?
>And that applies to each "I" at each level.
If there's an "I" there can be only one of you.
Otherwise,it's a "we" of whom perhaps one is
"more equal than others".
CryoNet - Fri 27 Jul 2001
-------------------------
#17112: why smart people do not choose cryonics [Raphael T. Haftka]
>On any controversial subject, I can find people who know more about that
>topic than I do, who are more intelligent than I am, and who hold the
>opposite opinion.
Certainly my experience also.
I joined a high-IQ group and found
loads of people who disagreed with me;
I think no matter how high you go on
such scales you will still find those
who disagree with you.
>One of the reasons that I like cryonics is that it fills a void created
>by the fact that I do not believe in god. That is, I use cryonics to
>alleviate my fear of dying instead of a belief in an afterlife. I am
>curious how many of you have a similar motivation, and whether it can
>define for us a target audience.
It's quite obvious to me that atheism
(which I have in turn made clear I regard
as ludicrous) is common among cryonicists;
I don't allow this to alienate me from the
concept though I remain far from sold.I do
think that further targeting at atheists
(as has been recommended by other atheists
here) has the potential to further type
cryonics as an atheistic cause,and thus
alienate the majority who understand that
there must be some reason for existence.
And the likelihood is that most atheists,
who after all believe there ISN'T a
fundamental underlying reason for existing,
will remain unswayed.
#17119: Re: message #17099 Junk mail-------- help [Michael LaTorra]
>I absolutely HATE junk e-mail. Unfortunately, we have no legal leverage
>and little practical control over it, aside from using e-mail filters
>(which are easily circumvented by spammers who create new e-mail accounts
>all the time).
>For more information and tools for tracing an IP address to a domain name
>and admin e-mail address, go to UXN Spam Combat at:http://combat.uxn.com/
Another site that may be useful:
http://www.spambouncer.org/
host of a plug-in program that can
do a lot of filtering and is kept
up-to-date,with other relevant links.
However,there has to be a Unix shell
with procmail behind it.
CryoNet - Sat 28 Jul 2001
-------------------------
#17126: Re: Infinite Self-Worth [Mark Plus]
>And three, considering the role of the Sick Man, the Old Man, and the
>Corpse in starting Gotama's "spiritual" quest (and flight from responsiblity,
>I might add, since he left his wife and children behind) -- well, unless our
>expectations for the future are going to get drastically sabotaged somehow,
>I don't see how a society that can largely eliminate sickness, aging and
>even death will strike one as unbearable.
I daresay that telling his story to
those who have grown up,not sheltered,
and still never seen the sick,old,or
dead would not be very effective at
winning converts to Buddhism.Even if
they are known rarities,their not
being inevitabilities will make the
perception of them be quite different.
#17128: Magic, Elitism, and the Triple Delusion [George Smith]
>Thomas R Mazanec writes in part:
> "Thousands of people, at most, have signed up for cryonics. Why do 99.9%
>of the smart, educated, wealthy population have nothing to do with cryonics?"
>Especially the "experts" in the fields of science, right?
Is there,or is there not,a correlation there?
According to Robert Ettinger doctors,at least,
are more likely than the general public to sign
up for cryonics.
I know that the more people know about nuclear
power,the more likely they are to support it.
That may be the case here too.Subject to the
support percentage never reaching 100% whatever
the knowledge level.
>And now,ELITISM:
>Frankly, this DOES compel me to some agreement.
>If I were to choose who should die, a mortalist or an immortalist
>(potential immortalist, if you prefer), the mortal goes down the tube.
>If you wish to assign value to a human being BASED ON HIS ACTIONS then
>the immortalist is worth many (infinite?) lives as he lives them as
>opposed to the single mortal who is done in maybe 100 years or less.
>To kill a true immortal would be equivalent over time to killing more
>than all the people who have ever lived to date.
So are you saying that because people
aspire to immortality,they are worth
more than those who do not?
Or only those who have attained their
"immortal" status in some fashion?
Obviously,an actual "true immortal"
could not die.
(A science fiction future history of mine
that I have long planned includes an extremely
small percentage of the population granted
immortality on adulthood after careful
selection...an elite by design too small
to be a ruling elite,but not generally
accorded special protections in law).
>This leads to depression and suicide in all its various forms. Not
>signing up for cryonics as an informed decision is just another form of
>suicide in my opinion.
Of course some religions say not joining
them has the same consequences.(If I
understand the LDS position correctly,
if you live virtuously without hearing
their message,you might go to the second
class heaven.Once you've heard it,you can
go to the first if you convert,but can do
no better than the third if you don't.
And explicitly denying that their claims
are true condemns you to Outer Darkness).
#17130: That dang Ms. Pringle! [john grigg]
>Heather Pringle, the journalist/author who wrote _The Mummy Congress_ and
>then later a Wired magazine article about us, and in doing so caused among
>cryonicists much irritation, is a popular gal on Amazon.com!
>Well, maybe we are a tad oversensitive, but I feel she really does need
>to "think through" her thoughts and arguments regarding cryonics. And who
>knows, maybe Ms. Pringle herself will sign up for cryonics at some point
>in her life! And she may even find happiness down the road with some
>reanimated "geeky" programmer who had the bodymod nanites turn him into a
>sexy Adonis! :)
She's 48 and I think she's married.
She lives in cryonics-prohibiting
British Columbia.
As I noted,she can be examined and
emailed at heatherpringle.com if
one wants to investigate her work
further.
(And maybe she reads Cryonet archives,or
will).
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17209