tpebop

Karma: 24

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 22:50 UTC
1 point
in reply to: JGWeissman’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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?

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 22:09 UTC
1 point
in reply to: Alicorn’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 17:17 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Paul Crowley’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 17:13 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Blueberry’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 17:06 UTC
0 points
in reply to: AngryParsley’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 16:40 UTC
1 point
in reply to: Paul Crowley’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 16:10 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Paul Crowley’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 7:01 UTC
0 points
on: Normal 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.

tpebop 22 Jan 2010 6:41 UTC
20 points
in reply to: Paul Crowley’s comment on: Normal Cryonics
I’m only posting this to play devils advocate, if not to stir up the debate a bit. I apologize for any spelling or grammatical errors. English isn’t my first language.

To make groupthink testable, Irving Janis devised eight symptoms indicative of groupthink (1977).

(My interpretations may be flawed, feel free to point out any flaws in my logic)

> 1. Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking. Cryonics = eternal life in the future, relatively high financial risk, relatively low risk of being revived. The risk is still worth if if you could possibly be alive again.

> 2. Rationalizing warnings that might challenge the group’s assumptions. Reanimation in the future might be expensive, reanimation might not be possible, Alcor may go bankrupt, Consciousness may not be transferable, reanimation is not possible now.

> 3. Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions. The diehards of the group seem to take no hesitation to call another person outside of their name if they simply do not agree with those who support cryonics.

>4. Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, disfigured, impotent, or stupid. “If you don’t sign your child up for cryonics you’re a lousy parent”

> 5. Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questions the group, couched in terms of “disloyalty”. Not so much pressure as people questioning those who aren’t yet sold on cryonics just yet, or those who don’t believe in it all together.

>6. Self censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus. This obviously can’t be proven, I’m assuming some have omitted statements from their replies to this article to avoid conflict.

>7. Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement. I’m not so sure if there is an illusion of unanimity, seems that everyone is in agreement that cryonics is a logical/rational choice. This maybe be an illusion, I don’t know.

>8. Mind guards — self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information. Hello Eliezer.

I’d like to state that I have no intentions of attacking anyone discussing this topic. I’m only trying to stir up friendly debate.
What links here?
- Boo lights: groupthink edition by Morendil (15 Feb 2010 18:29 UTC; 27 points)