Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Starspun · 07-10-2002, 05:25 PM

Recently, Ted Williams died. Truth be told, I don't know him from Adam, but, I do know his son put him in a cryogenic state which really pissed off his sister.
On a side note, with nanotechnology in it's infancy, it still holds vast promise to change our very lives, especially in medical advances. One of those advances being the possibility to stop and quite possibly reverse aging by repairing individual cells in the body.
My question to you is this:
If cryogenics cost about as much as a regular funeral or cremation, would you opt for a cryogenic state with hope for a nano-resurrection, or, opt for eternal death?
Personally, I like me. I don't want to leave me. Screw death. Freeze my ugly ass in hope for a brighter tomorrow. I love life!!
How about you?

Edit:ugh, mods, sorry. might you move this to the appropriate forum, please.

[ July 10, 2002: Message edited by: Starspun ]</p>

Godless Dave · 07-11-2002, 05:41 AM

What benefit would a future society derive from resurrecting dead people?

Larry Niven answers that question in his novel A World Out of Time, where people who were cryogenically frozen are revived in the 22nd century - to be slaves. "Do you think the future owes you something?" the protagonist is asked.

Starspun · 07-11-2002, 07:31 AM

Quote:

What benefit would a future society derive from resurrecting dead people?

We could hypothesis many things, but, that is not the question.

the question is: If cryogenics cost about as much as a regular funeral or cremation, would you opt for a cryogenic state with hope for a nano-resurrection, or, opt for eternal death?

Oxidizing Material · 07-11-2002, 08:16 AM

Yeah, but it humanity continues in the way it's going, I'm not so sure I want to be alive now

Starspun · 07-11-2002, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Yeah, but it humanity continues in the way it's going, I'm not so sure I want to be alive now

Your answer would be no?

Oxidizing Material · 07-11-2002, 08:48 AM

Draw your own conclusions from that

Jamie_L · 07-11-2002, 09:06 AM

Freezing after death? Yeah, if it was cheap, I'd go for it. Why not? The worst that happens (sci-fi aside) is I don't get revived, and then... I'm dead. But wait, my other option was being dead, so whatever.

Jamie

Starspun · 07-11-2002, 09:07 AM

[QUOTE]Draw your own conclusions from that /QUOTE]

ok. But, i have to be honest here. I stopped reading minds about, um, 6 months ago. i may get it wrong.

Corwin · 07-11-2002, 10:24 AM

Cryo isn't cheap, but it's worth it IMHO. The cost can generally be defrayed... (Alcor takes life insurance now...) and the potential benefits are staggering.

Concerns? There are some... most of which are either mostly unfounded or are being worked on. Yes, freezing in liquid nitrogen causes substantial cellular damage. However, for one thing, you're already dead... (at least by our medical definition of 'dead.') so it doesn't make much difference, and for another, nanotech could in theory repair that kind of damage. Even with these points, a new technique is being perfected called vitrification. (Freezing at a higher temperature, until the medium you're frozen in solidifies into a glass.) Since there are effectively no ice crystals, (the medium has a much higher concentration of antifreeze in it...) there is effectively no cellular damage. (Aside from the damage caused by 'death,' which while irrepairable to modern medical tech... should be fixable to future medics.) This technique is already in use for transplant tissues, and Alcor offers it for neuropreservation. ('Frozen heads.')

As far as benefits to society... or the possibility of being revived as slave labor... for the former what difference does it make? What benefit to society does aggressive medical care for the terminally ill offer? None really. But we do it anyway because it's the morally right thing to do. (As decided by society.) That isn't likely to change any time soon. With the medical technology we're talking about here, cryopatients become legally patients. As long as you have the ability to revive someone a doctor is morally, ethcially and legally responsible to do so as long as the patient has not signed a DNR. (Do Not Resussitate order.) A cryopatient, essentially by definition, has not signed such an order. Slave labor? Why bother? If people want slaves they'll take living slaves. So many people (especially in sci-fi, since it makes a good story) assume that the entire concept of personal rights, individual liberty, and law in general will go completely out the window. When you set up a cryo contract, you do exactly that. Establish a legal, binding contract involving power of attorney and a legal responsibility to revive the patient when the means become available.

Oxidizing Material · 07-11-2002, 12:00 PM

Okay, Starspun, my bad. I don't like being vague even though I end up being so half the time I speak.

At the present time, I have no desire to continue my life past its natural expiration date, and to further that, I really have no plans on living past 20. There are a number of contributions leading to this decision, namely medical/pyschological issues, and a wide range of other things.

Cryo freezing, while wicked cool in theory, cryogenics just isn't something I could put up with. Being a dead human popsicle, whatever, but I plan to go directly into the ground once I cease to waste air on this planet.

07-10-2002, 05:25 PM	#1
Starspun Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 334	A loophole around death Recently, Ted Williams died. Truth be told, I don't know him from Adam, but, I do know his son put him in a cryogenic state which really pissed off his sister. On a side note, with nanotechnology in it's infancy, it still holds vast promise to change our very lives, especially in medical advances. One of those advances being the possibility to stop and quite possibly reverse aging by repairing individual cells in the body. My question to you is this: If cryogenics cost about as much as a regular funeral or cremation, would you opt for a cryogenic state with hope for a nano-resurrection, or, opt for eternal death? Personally, I like me. I don't want to leave me. Screw death. Freeze my ugly ass in hope for a brighter tomorrow. I love life!! How about you? Edit:ugh, mods, sorry. might you move this to the appropriate forum, please. [ July 10, 2002: Message edited by: Starspun ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-11-2002, 05:41 AM	#2
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	What benefit would a future society derive from resurrecting dead people? Larry Niven answers that question in his novel A World Out of Time, where people who were cryogenically frozen are revived in the 22nd century - to be slaves. "Do you think the future owes you something?" the protagonist is asked.

07-11-2002, 08:16 AM	#4
Oxidizing Material Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Somewhere where I don't know where I am Posts: 2,069	Yeah, but it humanity continues in the way it's going, I'm not so sure I want to be alive now

07-11-2002, 08:48 AM	#6
Oxidizing Material Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Somewhere where I don't know where I am Posts: 2,069	Draw your own conclusions from that

07-11-2002, 09:06 AM	#7
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	Freezing after death? Yeah, if it was cheap, I'd go for it. Why not? The worst that happens (sci-fi aside) is I don't get revived, and then... I'm dead. But wait, my other option was being dead, so whatever. Jamie

07-11-2002, 09:07 AM	#8
Starspun Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 334	[QUOTE]Draw your own conclusions from that /QUOTE] ok. But, i have to be honest here. I stopped reading minds about, um, 6 months ago. i may get it wrong.

07-11-2002, 10:24 AM	#9
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	Cryo isn't cheap, but it's worth it IMHO. The cost can generally be defrayed... (Alcor takes life insurance now...) and the potential benefits are staggering. Concerns? There are some... most of which are either mostly unfounded or are being worked on. Yes, freezing in liquid nitrogen causes substantial cellular damage. However, for one thing, you're already dead... (at least by our medical definition of 'dead.') so it doesn't make much difference, and for another, nanotech could in theory repair that kind of damage. Even with these points, a new technique is being perfected called vitrification. (Freezing at a higher temperature, until the medium you're frozen in solidifies into a glass.) Since there are effectively no ice crystals, (the medium has a much higher concentration of antifreeze in it...) there is effectively no cellular damage. (Aside from the damage caused by 'death,' which while irrepairable to modern medical tech... should be fixable to future medics.) This technique is already in use for transplant tissues, and Alcor offers it for neuropreservation. ('Frozen heads.') As far as benefits to society... or the possibility of being revived as slave labor... for the former what difference does it make? What benefit to society does aggressive medical care for the terminally ill offer? None really. But we do it anyway because it's the morally right thing to do. (As decided by society.) That isn't likely to change any time soon. With the medical technology we're talking about here, cryopatients become legally patients. As long as you have the ability to revive someone a doctor is morally, ethcially and legally responsible to do so as long as the patient has not signed a DNR. (Do Not Resussitate order.) A cryopatient, essentially by definition, has not signed such an order. Slave labor? Why bother? If people want slaves they'll take living slaves. So many people (especially in sci-fi, since it makes a good story) assume that the entire concept of personal rights, individual liberty, and law in general will go completely out the window. When you set up a cryo contract, you do exactly that. Establish a legal, binding contract involving power of attorney and a legal responsibility to revive the patient when the means become available.

07-11-2002, 12:00 PM	#10
Oxidizing Material Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Somewhere where I don't know where I am Posts: 2,069	Okay, Starspun, my bad. I don't like being vague even though I end up being so half the time I speak. At the present time, I have no desire to continue my life past its natural expiration date, and to further that, I really have no plans on living past 20. There are a number of contributions leading to this decision, namely medical/pyschological issues, and a wide range of other things. Cryo freezing, while wicked cool in theory, cryogenics just isn't something I could put up with. Being a dead human popsicle, whatever, but I plan to go directly into the ground once I cease to waste air on this planet.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.