From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@ricochet.net)
Date: Wed May 02 2001 - 19:10:48 MDT
Jim Fehlinger wrote
>Lee Corbin wrote:
>> Does an obscure type of ant in the Amazon jungle
>> "deserve" to have its pattern recorded for all time?
>> Most people today would say yes.
> Well, at least E. O. Wilson would. But when you say "type",
> you're introducing a subtle shift in the argument.
Yes, sorry about that. Thanks for pointing it out; I
was being sloppy.
> I doubt if even E. O. Wilson would claim that every
> individual of some obscure species of Amazon jungle
> ant need be preserved.
I'm hardly asking that merely the patterns of extant people
be preserved, but that they be able to get runtime as well.
That's the whole issue. As Larry Ellison apparently likes
to remark, "Death has never made any sense to me. How can
a person be there and then just vanish, just not be there?"
The more that you think about it, the more senseless
death becomes, especially in light of the ridiculously
modest resources that it would require to keep someone
alive forever. A cubic millimeter would easily suffice
for the complete emulation of quite a few people, even
at the rate of 1 second per second.
> I imagine it wouldn't take a lot of data to blend up somebody
> a lot like Jim F. at the personality paint store...
> Which of these differences [that make Jim F. who he is, and
> not someone of a similar background] makes a difference worth
> preserving, in how much detail?
Worth preserving???
> But how many of us can really objectively believe that we
> embody a pattern so unique and valuable that we couldn't
> be replaced by one of the other six billion humans on
> the planet (or some pattern synthesized from the "types"
> they represent) without making a dent in the history of
> the Cosmos?
We are going around and around on this. "VALUABLE TO
WHOM?", I fairly want to scream. As with some of
Samantha's earlier sentences, you seem to be looking
for a Cosmic Significance that seems to be the
Almighty under some other name.
Why should your life have to make a dent in the history of
the universe to be valuable to you? Or to me, or to anyone?
For every human being who has ever lived, his or her life has
been for at least some of that time of crucial importance
to him or her. Is there any reason that we should cavalierly
conclude that their lives aren't worth saving if we end up
with the means to do so?
Can you see what a transformation of values that cryonics
stands for? Nothing less than the repudiation of death for
all sentient beings. While many have every right to object on
ground of (current) practicality, I can no longer understand
why this, in principle, is objectionable to anyone.
The heart leads the mind, and if your heart were to whisper
to you, "It's all right to live forever, and it's all right
for everyone to live forever", can your mind really object?
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:27 MST