I do not understand this obsession with preserving every living mind (it seems to me that EY and LW in general implicitly or explicitly subscribe to the popular notion that a body is a vessel for the mind).
Those who wish to be frozen and can afford it are free to take their chances, those who believe in eternal soul or reincarnation are free to take theirs, those who would rather die forever should not be judged, either.
It sure sucks if you want to get frozen but cannot afford it, and it is a reasonable goal to reduce cost/improve odds of revival, but it is but one of many useful goals to work on.
Those who wish to be frozen and can afford it are free to take their chances, those who believe in eternal soul or reincarnation are free to take theirs, those who would rather die forever should not be judged, either.
There are laws of thought, and correct decisions (that we don’t know very well). What people believe is mostly irrelevant to what the right thing to do is.
People might have the right (power) to do whatever they believe, they might indeed in practice be free to implement any decision they choose, and they might intrinsically value this power, but this fact is irrelevant for judging the correctness of their decisions.
(In short, I object to the “everyone can make up their own correctness” mindset. We do know better than to let considerations about souls and afterlife determine the right answer.)
I am not sure what you mean by “correct” and “right answer” in this case.
Life is not math. If your goal is to improve the subjective quality of life of each person, there is no clear-cut answer to how to do that. If your goal is something “bigger”, you better state what it is upfront, so that it and the means to achieve it can be discussed first.
It’s much harder than the most difficult math that humans are able to do, but the answers are still non-mysterious, and it is your calling and power as a person to seek them.
It seems very likely that if cryopreservation was the default option—or even just a rather standard option—that many, many, many more people would go for it than do at present. And still while exercising free choice. Also, there seem to be few religious commandments against cryopreservation, so (if it worked) there would always be the option of dying or reincarnating later on.
So, two possible worlds, both with free choice, and one with much more death in one than the other—I see why we’d want to tilt the balance away from it.
Not sure what you are asking. I would pay for cryo for myself if I could afford it and considered it a worthwhile investment vs other alternatives (such as a nice vacation while still alive).
Presumably, if cryo was affordable and mainstream enough, many people would go for it. After all, people pay more to get buried rather than cremated, and there is precious little rationale for that.
Those who wish to be frozen and can afford it are free to take their chances, those who believe in eternal soul or reincarnation are free to take theirs, those who would rather die forever should not be judged, either.
This seems to intersect non-trivially with positions on suicide.
This seems to intersect non-trivially with positions on suicide.
There are many grey areas, sure, some more politically/emotionally charged than others. Let’s not complicate things by adding the terms like suicide, abortion and euthanasia into the mix.
I do not understand this obsession with preserving every living mind (it seems to me that EY and LW in general implicitly or explicitly subscribe to the popular notion that a body is a vessel for the mind).
Those who wish to be frozen and can afford it are free to take their chances, those who believe in eternal soul or reincarnation are free to take theirs, those who would rather die forever should not be judged, either.
It sure sucks if you want to get frozen but cannot afford it, and it is a reasonable goal to reduce cost/improve odds of revival, but it is but one of many useful goals to work on.
There are laws of thought, and correct decisions (that we don’t know very well). What people believe is mostly irrelevant to what the right thing to do is.
People might have the right (power) to do whatever they believe, they might indeed in practice be free to implement any decision they choose, and they might intrinsically value this power, but this fact is irrelevant for judging the correctness of their decisions.
(In short, I object to the “everyone can make up their own correctness” mindset. We do know better than to let considerations about souls and afterlife determine the right answer.)
I am not sure what you mean by “correct” and “right answer” in this case.
Life is not math. If your goal is to improve the subjective quality of life of each person, there is no clear-cut answer to how to do that. If your goal is something “bigger”, you better state what it is upfront, so that it and the means to achieve it can be discussed first.
It’s much harder than the most difficult math that humans are able to do, but the answers are still non-mysterious, and it is your calling and power as a person to seek them.
It seems very likely that if cryopreservation was the default option—or even just a rather standard option—that many, many, many more people would go for it than do at present. And still while exercising free choice. Also, there seem to be few religious commandments against cryopreservation, so (if it worked) there would always be the option of dying or reincarnating later on.
So, two possible worlds, both with free choice, and one with much more death in one than the other—I see why we’d want to tilt the balance away from it.
I guess I just don’t give as much value to a generic human life as you do.
Do you give it any value? Would generic acceptance of cryopreservation be something you’d take if it were free?
Not sure what you are asking. I would pay for cryo for myself if I could afford it and considered it a worthwhile investment vs other alternatives (such as a nice vacation while still alive).
Presumably, if cryo was affordable and mainstream enough, many people would go for it. After all, people pay more to get buried rather than cremated, and there is precious little rationale for that.
This seems to intersect non-trivially with positions on suicide.
There are many grey areas, sure, some more politically/emotionally charged than others. Let’s not complicate things by adding the terms like suicide, abortion and euthanasia into the mix.
What does “not be judged” mean?
Who disputes this?