X-Message-Number: 9511
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 09:17:57 -0400
From: "John P. Pietrzak" <>
Subject: Re: More on probability of cryonics
References: <>

> In a previous post I noted that you can use previous knowledge to
> explain both why we can be optimistic on our chances and why laymen
> are justified in ignoring us. I do not mean that you must choose
> between one view and the other, but that BOTH ARE CORRECT.
> [...]
> A hundred and fifty years ago, laymen were completely justified to
> dismiss the notion that a man could fly, given the fact that many
> crackpots (including  Leonardo da Vinci) tried and failed.
> 
> However, around that time, with increasing understanding of the
> mechanics of flight, an informed person would have been justified in
> being optimistic that EVENTUALLY people would fly.

Ah, yes.  But you see, this is a qualification that Mr. Ettinger's
argument does not take into account.  I too believe that eventually,
suspended animation will be possible.  In that context, early
experimenters would certainly be justified in their _optimism_ of the
concept.  However, I would note that it was only after years of study,
trials, and hard work that the Wright brothers managed to get their
effort off the ground.

Not every attempt to achieve flight was a success.  The vast majority of
initial attempts at flight were failures.  Mr. Ettinger implies in his
arguments that we've _already_ finished the race, that suspended
animation is a success in it's current form.  At this point in time, I
just can't feel that he's justified in holding this point of view.

John

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9511