X-Message-Number: 8896
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #8887 - #8892
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 00:04:34 -0800 (PST)

Hi again!

One philosopher has split those thinking about the "copy" issue into two
camps: those who consider continuity important and those who don't. This is
not a bad distinction, actually --- even though the continuity people may
know very well that they're been constantly replaced, atom by atom. It's
CONTINUOUS, you see.

While I hardly had the time to go into it in detail, the editorial for the
upcoming issue of PERIASTRON will discuss just that issue. Fundamentally
each us must decide whether or not we'll continue to exist as ourselves
after revival FOR OURSELVES. There isn't any logical argument either way.
(There may be a PRACTICAL argument, in that making a complete and accurate
copy will likely be extremely difficult --- some might even claim impossible,
but for practical purposes extreme difficulty is enough. That means it would
be better to try and repair the original).

As for my personal opinion, for what it's worth, I'd accept that a copy 
was myself if a) it were good enough --- not as easy as those considering the
possibility blithely think, and b) there was only one copy at any one time.
Why b)? Because lots of things about my life depend on me being unique at
any one time. Like my wife, ownership of property, etc etc. In that sense
I literally CANNOT exist in more than one living copy, not because of 
physical problems in copying me but because the existence of another active
copy would affect my identity and thus whether or not I was ME. (My identity
is what it is because of my environment, too). But criterion b) says 
nothing at all about sequences of copies, each one unique at the time.

Secondly, NO, we should not use human beings who are not cryonicists as
experimental subjects. Ever. First of all, to speak practically, that will go
far towards alienating the noncryonicists and making us all look like 
Frankensteins. To speak ideally, I have always thought that one reason we
are NOT persecuted and prevented from doing suspensions is that we are saying,
to EVERYONE, that immortality is for everyone. To then turn around and use
some of those everyones as experimental animals just doesn't get the message
out. Not only that, but it will do very bad things to our attitude toward  
those who have not signed up as yet. 

There is a caveat, though. If we use noncryonicists as experimental subjects
by trying out new solutions and treatments, already thoroughly tested on 
animals, on them, I can see it. But no one would consent to become such a
subject unless they were cryonicists but for one reason or another didn't
have the money. After all, it would be an attempt to preserve them for 
future revival.... just what noncryonicists do not want.  


			Best and long long life,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8896