I do not believe I’ll be singing up for cryonics. Not because I think it’s too expensive, or impossible to be reanimated. The reason I won’t be signing up is because I have no interest in living forever.
edit: I’d like to live to maybe 150~200. I don’t find that impossible with current medical/technological advances. The leading causes of death in old age tend to be as a result of organ failure and disease. I imagine that in the near future if any of my organs fail, I’ll be able to have them replaced via prosthesis, or cloned organs.
I guess it depends on how well I’m able to sustain my own existence. If at age 120(150~200) I’m unable to feed, or financially support myself. Then yes, I’d like to die. If I’m at the high point of my life, successful(this is relative, assume my evaluation of success is the same as yours), healthy, and have enough activities to keep me entertained, then I’d like to continue living.
If I am lucky enough to be eternally financially secure and healthy, then I’d like to live to the life expectancy of everyone else. this is taking into account cryonics. If it becomes ubiquitous to live very long, via any means, then I’d like to live just as long. If in 2010, the average adult male lived to be 30 years old, I wouldn’t want to live to be 200.
This is really interesting. Do you have a dispreference for uniqueness in other things, too? Do you think that societies are optimized for the average lifespans of their inhabitants and wouldn’t be able to deal with a longer-lived outlying specimen? You specified “male”—if males lived 30 years and females got to be a thousand, would you still want to live to be only 30?
I personally just think that everyone should be given the same chance to live a long and happy life. I don’t think anyone should be “privileged” enough to live longer than anyone else, simply because they have the financial means to do so.
I do think societies are optimized for their average inhabitant lifespan. If a group of “super humans” came about, I think that they’d be met with extreme opposition from other “normal” people. If you’ve ever read a history boook, or watched the news, then you’re already aware of the numerous examples prejudice (that often lead to violence/genocide) for those who are different, be it ethnicity, creed, gender, or sexual preference.
Probably, I wouldn’t want to go around being the “freakishly immortal” male, I imagine it’d reduce my chances of finding adequate mates, and/or fitting into society. As irrational as that sounds, I quite like being social/normal.
I personally just think that everyone should be given the same chance to live a long and happy life. I don’t think anyone should be “privileged” enough to live longer than anyone else, simply because they have the financial means to do so.
Should we give up antibiotics because some people can’t afford them?
Well, if you were the freakishly immortal male, nobody would (probably) be able to tell until you were the far side of thirty; so while it might or might not help, it doesn’t seem like it’d hurt, in the finding-mates department.
Well, even if you were preserved, you still wouldn’t live “forever”. You could still die in an accident in some way that wouldn’t allow you to be dethawed. You could still die from an illness that hasn’t been cured yet. And you wouldn’t survive the heat death of the universe.
But, why wouldn’t you want to keep living? I hear this sentiment often and really don’t understand it. I’ve always wanted to be immortal.
I actually feel the same way. It’s not going to stop me from signing up for cryo, though.
The feeling isn’t rational; if anything, I’d describe it as instinctual, since it seems to be fairly free-floating and I don’t remember having believed anything that seems likely to have spawned it. I try not to build on it, but it has acquired some cruft over the years. The main component is the feeling that anything over about 1,000 years’ lifetime is just crazy talk—literally unthinkable in a way that my brain classifies as ‘impossible’ for no good reason. A recurring crufty rationalization of this is the idea that I wouldn’t be able to handle 1,000 years’ worth of cultural change. Another component of the issue is the feeling that I have that eventually I’ll be ‘done’ - I’ll run out of interesting things to do, or just not want to continue for whatever reason. For no apparent reason, my brain attaches the idea ’200 years old’ to this bit.
Of course, I also rather strongly suspect that if I live to be 1,000 (subjective) years old, I’ll feel the same way, just with the numbers ’10,000′ and ‘2,000’ where I have ‘1,000’ and ‘200’ now. Either way, it seems like living that long and finding out is a good solution to this problem.
I was counting cultural change since I was born, though perhaps it’d make more sense to count cultural change since I started participating in the world—no more than 30 years’ worth, by either count.
You’ve gone from no culture at all (which I somewhat arbitrarily placed as the equivalent of 50kyrs ago) to the present in only as many years as you are old. A mere 1,000 more years of change, experienced in real time, should be easy in comparison.
Think back to whenever your earliest memories are, and the person you were then. Think of that magnitude of change as being just the beginning.
I already had a reasonably good grasp of some parts of our culture as far back as I remember. I’m also already having trouble really keeping up with the world as it is now—I have trouble remembering that cell phones and laptops are commonplace, for example.
My model of how comprehension of culture works is based on the Critical Period Hypothesis—I suspect that we get one burst of really good ability to pick that kind of concept up, and then have a much lower ability for the rest of our lives.
It does occur to me that the kind of advanced science that would be able to reverse cryo preservation might well be able to recreate that kind of ability, though, now that I’ve thought enough about it to spell it out.
It does occur to me that the kind of advanced science that would be able to reverse cryo preservation might well be able to recreate that kind of ability, though, now that I’ve thought enough about it to spell it out.
I’d put a much higher probability on that kind of ‘advanced science’ than on cryonics working, FWIW. The key ingredients like BDNF are already loosely known, and we already know a lot of drugs (like piracetam) that have effects on BDNF.
I phrased my original statement from the point of view of a person who lives in a world where people live to be 80. I’d like to live as long as everyone else lives, if cryonics, prosthesis, nanotechnology, or some unforeseen technology come across that allows people to live to be thousands of years old, then I’d like to live as long as them too. I’m afraid of being alone, and I wouldn’t like to be the last person, or one of the last people alive.
OK, but do you have an interest in living for say… 100 years ? 200 years? 1,000,000 years? All of these lifespans are significantly shorter than forever, yet longer than current lifespans.
My opinion has changed. I’d like to live as long as everyone else. No more, no less. If the average life expectancy of a healthy American male was 1,000 years, then I’d like to live to be the ripe old age of 1,000. I would not like to rely on cryonics to extend my life. I would however use cloned organs, full body prosthesis, or nanotechnology to extend my life.
My biggest concern with cryonics is whether my consciousness could be transferred to a new body. I’m still skeptical about how consciousness is formed exactly. I’m skeptical that if an exact (to the atomic scale) replica of my brain is created, that it might not be me. I’m not willing to bet money that could go toward my (future) child’s college expenses, a house, or emergency medical expenses. I’d also note that I am currently trying to decide between textbooks, food, and rent. Perhaps if I were more financially secure my opinion would be different.
If consciousness is proven to be concrete, and/or easily transferable then I’ll sign up for cryonics. Until then I’ll live my current life to the fullest, by wasting my money on tangible, menial activities like watching movies, and playing laser tag with my brother.
My biggest concern with cryonics is whether my consciousness could be transferred to a new body. I’m still skeptical about how consciousness is formed exactly. I’m skeptical that if an exact (to the atomic scale) replica of my brain is created, that it might not be me.
The key point of the linked article is that an atom for atom replica of your brain would direct its body to talk about its consious experiences for the same reason you talk about your consious experiences, so it would be an astounding coincidence if your reports of consiousness corresponded with your experience if that consious experience was not part of the causal physics governing the atoms.
I don’t understand. Are you saying that if an exactly replica of my brain was created, then it wouldn’t be me? If that’s the case, then why sign up for cryonics?
I do not believe I’ll be singing up for cryonics. Not because I think it’s too expensive, or impossible to be reanimated. The reason I won’t be signing up is because I have no interest in living forever.
Can you be more precise about the age at which you wish to die?
edit: I’d like to live to maybe 150~200. I don’t find that impossible with current medical/technological advances. The leading causes of death in old age tend to be as a result of organ failure and disease. I imagine that in the near future if any of my organs fail, I’ll be able to have them replaced via prosthesis, or cloned organs.
And once 120, you’d like to die, even if you find you’re in better health at 120 than you are now?
I guess it depends on how well I’m able to sustain my own existence. If at age 120(150~200) I’m unable to feed, or financially support myself. Then yes, I’d like to die. If I’m at the high point of my life, successful(this is relative, assume my evaluation of success is the same as yours), healthy, and have enough activities to keep me entertained, then I’d like to continue living.
So at what point would you like to die no matter how well you’re doing?
If I am lucky enough to be eternally financially secure and healthy, then I’d like to live to the life expectancy of everyone else. this is taking into account cryonics. If it becomes ubiquitous to live very long, via any means, then I’d like to live just as long. If in 2010, the average adult male lived to be 30 years old, I wouldn’t want to live to be 200.
This is really interesting. Do you have a dispreference for uniqueness in other things, too? Do you think that societies are optimized for the average lifespans of their inhabitants and wouldn’t be able to deal with a longer-lived outlying specimen? You specified “male”—if males lived 30 years and females got to be a thousand, would you still want to live to be only 30?
I personally just think that everyone should be given the same chance to live a long and happy life. I don’t think anyone should be “privileged” enough to live longer than anyone else, simply because they have the financial means to do so.
I do think societies are optimized for their average inhabitant lifespan. If a group of “super humans” came about, I think that they’d be met with extreme opposition from other “normal” people. If you’ve ever read a history boook, or watched the news, then you’re already aware of the numerous examples prejudice (that often lead to violence/genocide) for those who are different, be it ethnicity, creed, gender, or sexual preference.
Probably, I wouldn’t want to go around being the “freakishly immortal” male, I imagine it’d reduce my chances of finding adequate mates, and/or fitting into society. As irrational as that sounds, I quite like being social/normal.
Should we give up antibiotics because some people can’t afford them?
Well, if you were the freakishly immortal male, nobody would (probably) be able to tell until you were the far side of thirty; so while it might or might not help, it doesn’t seem like it’d hurt, in the finding-mates department.
Well, even if you were preserved, you still wouldn’t live “forever”. You could still die in an accident in some way that wouldn’t allow you to be dethawed. You could still die from an illness that hasn’t been cured yet. And you wouldn’t survive the heat death of the universe.
But, why wouldn’t you want to keep living? I hear this sentiment often and really don’t understand it. I’ve always wanted to be immortal.
I actually feel the same way. It’s not going to stop me from signing up for cryo, though.
The feeling isn’t rational; if anything, I’d describe it as instinctual, since it seems to be fairly free-floating and I don’t remember having believed anything that seems likely to have spawned it. I try not to build on it, but it has acquired some cruft over the years. The main component is the feeling that anything over about 1,000 years’ lifetime is just crazy talk—literally unthinkable in a way that my brain classifies as ‘impossible’ for no good reason. A recurring crufty rationalization of this is the idea that I wouldn’t be able to handle 1,000 years’ worth of cultural change. Another component of the issue is the feeling that I have that eventually I’ll be ‘done’ - I’ll run out of interesting things to do, or just not want to continue for whatever reason. For no apparent reason, my brain attaches the idea ’200 years old’ to this bit.
Of course, I also rather strongly suspect that if I live to be 1,000 (subjective) years old, I’ll feel the same way, just with the numbers ’10,000′ and ‘2,000’ where I have ‘1,000’ and ‘200’ now. Either way, it seems like living that long and finding out is a good solution to this problem.
You’ve already handled ~50,000 years of cultural change.
I was counting cultural change since I was born, though perhaps it’d make more sense to count cultural change since I started participating in the world—no more than 30 years’ worth, by either count.
How are you counting it, and why?
You’ve gone from no culture at all (which I somewhat arbitrarily placed as the equivalent of 50kyrs ago) to the present in only as many years as you are old. A mere 1,000 more years of change, experienced in real time, should be easy in comparison.
Think back to whenever your earliest memories are, and the person you were then. Think of that magnitude of change as being just the beginning.
I already had a reasonably good grasp of some parts of our culture as far back as I remember. I’m also already having trouble really keeping up with the world as it is now—I have trouble remembering that cell phones and laptops are commonplace, for example.
My model of how comprehension of culture works is based on the Critical Period Hypothesis—I suspect that we get one burst of really good ability to pick that kind of concept up, and then have a much lower ability for the rest of our lives.
It does occur to me that the kind of advanced science that would be able to reverse cryo preservation might well be able to recreate that kind of ability, though, now that I’ve thought enough about it to spell it out.
I’d put a much higher probability on that kind of ‘advanced science’ than on cryonics working, FWIW. The key ingredients like BDNF are already loosely known, and we already know a lot of drugs (like piracetam) that have effects on BDNF.
I phrased my original statement from the point of view of a person who lives in a world where people live to be 80. I’d like to live as long as everyone else lives, if cryonics, prosthesis, nanotechnology, or some unforeseen technology come across that allows people to live to be thousands of years old, then I’d like to live as long as them too. I’m afraid of being alone, and I wouldn’t like to be the last person, or one of the last people alive.
OK, but do you have an interest in living for say… 100 years ? 200 years? 1,000,000 years? All of these lifespans are significantly shorter than forever, yet longer than current lifespans.
My opinion has changed. I’d like to live as long as everyone else. No more, no less. If the average life expectancy of a healthy American male was 1,000 years, then I’d like to live to be the ripe old age of 1,000. I would not like to rely on cryonics to extend my life. I would however use cloned organs, full body prosthesis, or nanotechnology to extend my life.
My biggest concern with cryonics is whether my consciousness could be transferred to a new body. I’m still skeptical about how consciousness is formed exactly. I’m skeptical that if an exact (to the atomic scale) replica of my brain is created, that it might not be me. I’m not willing to bet money that could go toward my (future) child’s college expenses, a house, or emergency medical expenses. I’d also note that I am currently trying to decide between textbooks, food, and rent. Perhaps if I were more financially secure my opinion would be different.
If consciousness is proven to be concrete, and/or easily transferable then I’ll sign up for cryonics. Until then I’ll live my current life to the fullest, by wasting my money on tangible, menial activities like watching movies, and playing laser tag with my brother.
It sounds like you are worried about philosophical zombies.
The key point of the linked article is that an atom for atom replica of your brain would direct its body to talk about its consious experiences for the same reason you talk about your consious experiences, so it would be an astounding coincidence if your reports of consiousness corresponded with your experience if that consious experience was not part of the causal physics governing the atoms.
I don’t understand. Are you saying that if an exactly replica of my brain was created, then it wouldn’t be me? If that’s the case, then why sign up for cryonics?
No, I am saying the opposite, that the exact replica of your brain would be you, complete with your consiousness.