X-Message-Number: 2282
Date: Wed, 26 May 93 06:51:02 GMT
From:  (Garret Smyth)
Subject: CRYONICS Neuro debate

Art Quaife:
> 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.

I will repaet a question I asked on the net some time ago on this very net:-
precisely what conditioning goes on outside the brain?


> But in completely discarding the old model, there is the danger of
> throwing out some of the baby with the bathwater.

What bathwater (evidence, not speculation, please)?

Brian Wowk:
> >   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.

This is a TOTALLY specious arguement. No-one remotely suggests that one would
come back as a Davros like, wheelchair-bound, motor neuron-less, dribbler
that can only speak by means of a computer with a voice from a 60's b movie.
Art is quite well aware that the aim of neuro-suspension is to restore one to
a fully functioning body, and his above paragraph implies otherwise.
I am sorry to use such emotive terms, but it is to reply to those used.
Brian's point is that people around today undergo serious "challenges" and 
still maintain the same identity - except those personality changes assosciated
with being decrepit which is potentially curable.

ArtQuaife:
> 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.

A) That's arguable,
B) What evidence is that the learning for these activities are not in the 
brain? There is plenty of evidence for [innate] walking reflexes in the spine,
but that the cerebellum handles learning.

Art
> >>  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.
Art:  
> My position could be wrong, but it is NOT dishonest.  

Perhaps not in the strict letter of what you say...

There are several other arguements, but this message is overlong already. I
apologies if anyone feels that I am being too vehement, but I am tired of 
silly arguements about neuro-suspension. Please note that I am not anti whole
body suspensions at all, but I frequently come across people, including whole 
body sign-ups who are anti neuro,  seemingly irrationaly.

Garret (Smyth)

PS: 
>  I don't have a sharp enough criteria of personal identity 
>  to answer for sure...
You should sort this out, since when you are revived people might say:
Its a Quaife, alright, but is it Art?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2282