X-Message-Number: 9991
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1998 11:35:39 +0100
From:  (John de Rivaz)
Subject: Re: Arthur C. Clarke

In article: <> Kevin R Spoering 
<> writes:
> I read with interest the posts on CryoNet that science fiction authors Joe
> Haldeman and Frederick Pohl are not signed up for cryonics.  Makes me 
wonder, does
> anyone know  Arthur C. Clarke's opinion on cryonics. In his book, 3001:
> THE FINAL ODYSSEY, he writes of astronaut Frank Poole being reanimated,
> and mentions downloading and nanotechnology, very similar to stuff we are
> familiar with already. But he also writes in 3001 that immortality has not
> been achieved yet (but how could we ever know about that for sure, forever
> is a long time ). It would be a shame to lose him.
> 

I think he is against cryopreservation for himself for the illogical reason 
that people are not constant, ie they you of today contains few of the atoms 
that was the you of ten years ago. I am not even sure that this idea of 
inconstancy is even correct, but that is said to be his reason for not 
wanting cryopreservation for himself.

In may of his books he has characters rejecting cryopreservation or other 
forms of rejuvenation or immortality. Notably, Songs of Distant Earth (his 
own favourite novel) and Rama Revealed.

On the general matter of celebrities, there is the problem of the sequence

1. if it has to be paid for it is worth having.
2. if it is free it is not worth having.
3. if it is compulsory it should be avoided at all costs.

therefore offering them cryopreservation free suggests point 2, it is not 
worth having.

However, such an offer may have the advantage that it would at least get the 
celebrity thinking about the idea, and it would only take one to accept it 
for the effort to have a very big pay-off in terms of the public image of 
cryonics.

Sometimes ordinary people offered it for free (eg paid for by a spouse or 
parent) do take it seriously. See, for example, 
http://www.longevb.demon.co.uk/lr66.htm
and read the first article. Therefore the same may apply to a celebrity. 
However there does seem to be a problem with offering something free to 
someone would could *easily* afford it themselves. It would be rather 
obviously be a marketing excercise.

-- 
Sincerely,     * Longevity Report:  http://www.longevb.demon.co.uk/lr.htm
John de Rivaz  * Fractal Report:    http://www.longevb.demon.co.uk/fr.htm
**************** Homepage:http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JohndeR
    In the information age, sharing can increase world wealth enormously,
        because giving information does not decrease your information.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9991