X-Message-Number: 5291 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 22:36:16 From: mike <> Subject: Revival of Cryonics Patients Revival of Cryonics Patients by Mike Perry There has been some recent discussion on CryoNet about the possibility that future humans or posthumans will not be interested in reviving cryonics patients, so the latter will not get revived even if they can be. Brian Wowk takes the opposite position that at least *some* future individuals *will* have this interest in revival, thus it will be done; but some others are doubtful because they think it will take a substantial number of people with interest in revival, which they think is unlikely. My own feeling is that eventually individuals will have control of mature nanotechnology so that one person singlehandedly, aided by a feasible retinue of nanites, could revive all the cryonics patients. (Probably with the help of feasible nanites the one person could create an automated, self-repairing, self-sustaining device that could revive all the cryonics patients.) It is possible that, resources not being unlimited, projects like this will require a waiting period until the necessary resource slot opens up (i.e. necessary materials and/or energy can be spared from other projects the then-immortal population of posthumans will be involved in). But it's a big universe and overall resources don't seem that limited, certainly not by our standards. I expect one or more organizations to be in existence that will be devoted to revival. There is at least one organization today, the Society for Venturism, which has this professed interest. Article six of the Venturist Manifesto reads: "Venturists are committed, so far as science will allow, to seeing that every person who desires a life in the future, and who, following this wish, has been frozen for possible reanimation, remains frozen as long as is necessary and is eventually reanimated." (The Venturists can be contacted at 10444 North Cave Creek Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85020 or you can e-mail them through me, ) The immortals we hope to become, along with whoever else may be around then, will have their own priorities, of course. But some of us will surely maintain a strong interest in reanimating cryonics patients, as long as there are patients to be reanimated. The November issue of *Spin* magazine has an article on cryonics. On p. 138 it asks, "... what is there to say about ... Mike Perry and his Order of Universal Immortalism, which hopes to resurrect every organism that's ever lived and died ...?" The question is left unanswered, but here is some information that seems appropriate. "Universal Immortalism" is the name I gave some years ago to the philosophical doctrine that all human beings and more generally all sentient creatures can and should be resurrected, in some form, at some future time, through scientific means. The resurrection can be in the form of an exact copy or duplicate, which is considered to be "as good" as the original. (Your own body is constantly exchanging material, for example, and gradually transforming itself into what is at at best only a duplicate of the former self.) An exact copy could also, in principle, be created by guesswork even without the original information, so a way is opened for resurrection in the absence of preservation of the remains. However, for various reasons I maintain that a straightforward resurrection using preserved remains and the information contained therein is preferred over alternatives. It is better to choose cryonics, and cryonics in turn would lose its meaning unless those who choose it eventually reap the benefit of being reanimated from their frozen state. Finally, to qualify as a resurrection it is not necessary to create an exact duplicate of the organism but only a "continuer" that remembers being the organism. In this way, then, it is possible to rationalize resurrection of, say evil human beings or other sentient life forms you wouldn't care to have around in their original forms. Evil people would be made good. Simpler-than-human life forms wouldn't necessarily be recreated as such but would have recollections or predispositions reflecting their earlier life. The whole thing I see as a fascinating project on many levels, one that should be eminently suited to a posthuman immortal, which I hope to become someday. (And I hope to be joined by other immortals interested in such a project, and don't expect they'll be too hard to find, when things have advanced far enough.) Some developments in modern physics, particularly the many-worlds formulation of quantum mechanics, make the whole idea seem more feasible and reasonable. (Many-worlds, for instance, can rationalize the recreation of a person by guesswork, as an authentic individual who really lived in one of the parallel time streams that exist under this theory.) Hans Moravec and Frank Tipler are two modern scientists of repute who have taken the idea of a universal resurrection seriously, and there are others. (Respect is also due to the Russian philosopher Nikolai Fedorov who had the same idea a century ago.) I started the Order of Universal Immortalism in 1990 as a subsidiary of the Venturist organization. For years OUI was mostly just a name but now there is increasing interest; a stand-alone Universal Immortalist organization is one possibility. I am also writing a book, *Forever for All*, to develop a philosophy of Universal Immortalism, and I hope to have a first draft finished in a year or so. This book will, of course, make a pitch for a universal resurrection, both on grounds of desirability and ultimate scientific feasibility, but *also will advocate cryonics*. My hope is that the ideas it presents will help to strengthen and stabilize interest in cryonics, and increase the likelihood of revival of patients once that becomes possible. I don't see this effort as unique, however. Other books will be written, whatever the outcome in this one instance (Bob Ettinger is working on one for example), and overall I think the interest in patient revivals will continue and grow. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5291