X-Message-Number: 2276
Date: Mon, 24 May 93 14:33:35 -0700
From: 
Subject: CRYONICS Reply to Brian Wowk

In #2264 Brian Work replies to me:
 
>   Neuropatients (and possibly today's wholebody patients) will be
>   revived by regrowing a new body around the repaired brain in a
>   nutrient bath.
 
Even if this scenario proves possible, it hardly changes my point. 
If you die at age 70, your current body has developed as an
integrated system with your brain for all of those 70 years.  If
you now discard that body, there is no way to make the newly grown
body repeat those 70 years of experience.  The newly grown body
will have the right genetics, but it will be missing 70 years of
environmental conditioning.
 
Admittedly there is a strong temptation to want a *better* body --
a 20 year old model rather than the decrepit 70 year-old model. 
But in completely discarding the old model, there is the danger of
throwing out some of the baby with the bathwater.
 
>   There are many people around today who have endured multi-organ
>   transplants, and spinal cord transections at the level of
>   cervical vertebrae.
 
First, these fall considerably short of replacement of the whole
torso.  Secondly, does a person who becomes quadriplegic undergo
some shift of identity?  I suspect yes.  Or is Stephen Hawking now
the "same" person as before getting ALS?  I don't have a sharp
enough criteria of personal identity to answer for sure, but I
think the answer is:  No, he is not. Or at least, he's undergone
more shift of identity than I would want.  Or do I want to become
a quadriplegic?  Hell no.  If the choice is between quadriplegia
and oblivion, I suppose I would choose quadriplegia.  But this is
hardly a future to plan for in making cryonics arrangements.
 
>   We can quibble about the technical details of revival, and
>   about whether revived neuropatients will remember how to play
>   the piano, or even walk.
 
If a pianist doesn't remember how to play the piano upon revival,
then there has been a definite loss of identity. Anyone who doesn't
remember how to walk upon revival has changed significantly.
 
Me:
>>  Whether the consciousness that emerges from the old brain
>>  adapting to the new body is close enough to the original
>>  consciousness to count as 'identity preservation', I do not
>>  know.  
 
Brian:
>   But it is plain dishonest to claim we "do not know" whether
>   saving the brain can save a person's life as that word is
>   presently understood in medicine.
 
My position could be wrong, but it is NOT dishonest.  Furthermore,
Brian has misrepresented my statement.   My statement was about
possible shifts of personal identity, not about whether something
is alive.
 
 
>   When this technology becomes available, will Art choose to have
>   his brain preserved as a discrete organ in perfect (reversible)
>   condition, or continue with the option of having his whole body
>   frozen using today's highly damaging techniques?
 
If reversible brain vitrification is achieved, I would probably opt
to have my brain stored separately.  But that is not now the case. 
Reversible brain vitrification is only an intriguing research
proposal to pursue, not a reality.  Our own researchers, particular
Dr. Hal Sternberg, have better success in preserving hamster brains
with much lower concentrations of cryoprotectants than those
required for vitrification.
 
On the other hand, suppose whole-body suspension becomes perfected
within our lifetimes, or at least is improved to the point where it
is clearly the way to go.  People who have only planned and
provided enough estate funding for head-only suspension may be flat
out of luck if at age 70 they are told:  You need to raise another
$100,000 to be properly frozen whole-body.
 
 
>   Dora Kent was a Coroner's Case from square one by legal
>   definition because her legal death was not pronounced by a 
>   state-licensed physician or nurse before her cryonic suspension
>   began.
 
Anything further I added concerning Alcor's handling of the
beginning of this incident would likely lead to the generation of
much heat and little light.  But I will stick by the general point
that the practice of sawing off people's heads is more likely to
attract adverse legal attention than is whole-body preservation. 
Certainly the initial press coverage of the Dora Kent case focused
much on the ghoulish nature of what had been done.
 
Art Quaife

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2276