X-Message-Number: 2829
From:  (Thomas Donaldson)
Subject: CRYONICS: RE cryonics #2828
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 1994 22:50:48 -0700 (PDT)

Hi again!

When I raised my questions about Basic Values I was essentially questioning
whether their existence or nonexistence was even relevant. One problem I see
with the Self-Circuit (assuming that our brains aren't more complicated and
wonderful than the existence of a self circuit) is that as such it carries
no values and cannot. Sure, we become aware of how we feel and what we think
and what we perceive, but that awareness alone implies nothing about the
actual CONTENT of how we feel, what we think, and what we perceive. It's the
content which is important.

Several pieces I sent in this discussion were somehow mangled by my node
on the net (which was VERY BUSY at the time) that they simply came back to
me. With this in mind, I do want to (perhaps repeat) make two points which 
might have gotten lost. First, I am actually sympathetic to Bob Ettinger's
attempt to work out some kind of common values as a basis for deciding what
values someone should or shouldn't have. For philosophies such as libertarian-
ism, to which I feel strongly attracted, it is a critical point not often
carefully examined: just how should libertarians deal with temporary or
permanent insanity --- especially since we now know that most insanity comes
from physical causes? (This even appeared in cryonics, with the suicide of
a member of Alcor. And for me, it is a major reason why I've always stopped
short of saying simply that I was a libertarian, full stop).

And second, in practical terms we can justifiably say that someone's values
should be LOGICALLY CONSISTENT. And for practical purposes that may be enough
of a reason to intervene.

It is an important question that Bob is trying to answer. I just don't see
that he has such an answer as yet.

			Long long life,


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2829