• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

My baffling question why Cryonics may not work

cryonics question consciousness

  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#1 ADVANCESSSS

  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 06 June 2014 - 02:56 AM


What if as I'm standing somewhere had a exact particle by particle body of me come together created......(I'm saying that the consciousness created should be a new consciousness, while I'm still conscious also, or even if I'm already dead it'd "still" be another consciousness created) ? As because there is just many of us consciousnesses. So then for me-my consciousness, to stay conscious, it should have to stay conscious. Right? It does when you sleep I'm sure, you dream lol and it erases some or all of the memory constantly and or before wakeup and 0-100% is kept, plus can go right from looking at something in dream to waking up next I noticed, plus blocks important or not memories from dream too, Although I haven't heard much if ever done-?-that someone came back conscious saying yes yes it's me after -10 or colder celsius surgery neuron activity stop, but also what about what I said?-Doesn't it make complete sense?

Edited by caliban, 06 June 2014 - 06:26 PM.
title

  • like x 1

#2 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 06 June 2014 - 04:33 AM

We regularly suspend consciousness for medical operations. People are even dead for a while while certain organs are replaced and they are then resuscitated and they are the same people. With cryonics, you're just dead (or deanimated as we like to call it) for alot longer. You'll be who you are when we print you a new body (google Tengion or the McGowan Institute) in a few decades or centuries. Is English your first language? 

 

Anyways, you might also want to google Rudi Hoffman cryonics insurance. Cryonics is most frequently paid for with insurance and it's cheapest when you sign up young. You can even get a great annuity that will eventually that will give you money you don't have to work for. I can't insist enough that you contact Rudi if you're thinking about cryonics. It'll work if you're preserved under the right conditions assuming we develop the technology to recover you in the future. Don't delay or you'll be like me and be unfunded in your thirties :)

 

This link has some good info on the options for cryonics. You'll also find a free Alcor membership in my other blog entries, or you can contact the Cryonics Institute about their free membership option as well and get to know some cryonicists and learn what it's all about.

 



#3 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 06 June 2014 - 05:26 AM

Well indeed like if a spirit thing OR a connection to space is left there......but then what about that one line above saying - What if as I'm standing somewhere had a exact particle by particle body of me come together created - Then while I stand there a new consciousness in that bodies head would form like naturally and so I'm thinking then if I die and my consciousness dies and the exact particle by particle body is created thenn then it would still be another new consciousness wouldn't it?


  • like x 1

#4 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 06 June 2014 - 05:41 AM

Yes, a particle by particle recreation is another you and not the original as there is no original "you material" remaining. However, the "you material" that remains with cryonics will likely be very substantial, thus preserving your identity and allowing you to grow into a new you instead of being recreated.



#5 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 06 June 2014 - 06:37 AM

But if I were still here standing up, and had a exact particle by particle body come together and created in front of me, I would still be standing there and the new body would be a new consciousness in that brain....right?


Edited by ADVANCE, 06 June 2014 - 06:38 AM.


#6 Shannon Vyff

  • Life Member, Director Lead Moderator
  • 3,897 posts
  • 702
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 06 June 2014 - 03:28 PM

Not if memories are transferred into the new brain. Also our brains are different, partical by partical from when we are babies.

#7 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 06 June 2014 - 05:21 PM

But if I were still here standing up, and had a exact particle by particle body come together and created in front of me, I would still be standing there and the new body would be a new consciousness in that brain....right?

A copy is always a copy no matter how perfect it is. A modified original would be more of an original than a perfect copy. Though the two would quickly go their own separate ways and maybe fight over the original's resources etc.



#8 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 06 June 2014 - 05:24 PM

This kind of worry can set you up for things... keep in mind that these are very finite topics that probably won't translate well to developing an ideology of you, but others who are getting to know you may try to extrapolate infinite information from such silly things... lol Don't define yourself by these arguments. Just be fluid.



#9 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 06 June 2014 - 08:16 PM

Well the new consciousness in front of me would be thinking just like me and think maybe the sammmme things ya, but....there is now two of us, and I'm saying the new one is indeed like evvveryone else on earth - another consciousness....if I died and a year later he was made...I would never be conscious and he, would be conscious...do you see what I'm thinking now?...



#10 Clacksberg

  • Guest
  • 138 posts
  • 5
  • Location:morecambe. england
  • NO

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:30 PM

Theres a Physicist, F Tipler.  He would argue and as theorised that if the individual aspects of say ADVANCES brain was simulated down to his or her individual detail (neurons, memory proteins etc) say in 2000 years time that would be wakeing up again - i think there for it's me!!

Just to put a bit of an angle on the debate. :)


Edited by cactus fast back, 06 June 2014 - 10:36 PM.


#11 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:54 PM

My point is though that there is indeed many of us consciousnesses and more being born and staying physically emerged like how these do - liquid/liquid bubbles/the physics of the universe~, to constantly stay as a constant consciousness or at least is a particle/orb/spirit mayybe~......And that if a exact was created in front of me I'll still be right there and all, and it would still be a new another consciousness and so if I'm dead it still be right?....The only answer you's would wanna go with is that if I'm still standing here and exact made in front of me that it would not be conscious and only if I die and then it was created I would go into it as the consciousness....which is meaning my consciousness right now then is attached to the universe or part of it or something, or a orb or spirit that will go back into it instantaniously if created...

 

Edited read again now once you see this line~


Edited by ADVANCE, 06 June 2014 - 11:02 PM.


#12 Clacksberg

  • Guest
  • 138 posts
  • 5
  • Location:morecambe. england
  • NO

Posted 06 June 2014 - 11:28 PM

@ADVANCE. Well, it's an experiment waiting to be tested, i guess, way in the future. There's no proof that you wouldn't exist in a kind of 'schizophrenic' limbo state, with you and an exact copy. Consciousness may work like that, we may have something like spirit, who knows. Take Hypnogogic/Hypnopompic imagery, Were obviously 'away' somewhere there.


Edited by cactus fast back, 07 June 2014 - 12:25 AM.


#13 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 07 June 2014 - 12:26 AM

When you get back to this topic cryonicsculture read my last replies above that you never read yet.



#14 John Schloendorn

  • Guest, Advisor, Guardian
  • 2,542 posts
  • 157
  • Location:Mountain View, CA

Posted 07 June 2014 - 07:44 PM

if I died and a year later he was made... I would never be conscious and he, would be conscious...

 

 

Nobody needs to die for this to happen.  It just happened to your yesterday's self.  And there, again, to your 1-second-ago self.  

 

You want to be this magical, persistent, featureless "soul" that can be literally identical to itself at other times, but you also want its survival to depend on the physical configuration of the atoms in your body.  That's looks bizarre to me, to the point of inconsistency:  If there's more to "you" than the configuration of atoms in your brain, then why would you care about physical death at all? (that's spiritualism)  Alternatively, if there's no more to "you" than the configuration of atoms, then why would "your" survival dependent on a concept of identity transcending what applies to configurations of atoms?  (that's materialism).  You can pick either spiritualism or materialism and be self-consistent.  But you're constructing some strange hybrid containing a little bit from each.

 

From a materialistic view, there's no point in arguing that dying with a surviving copy is as good as (or involves as much as) ordinary survival.  It's rather that daily survival is as bad as (or invovles as little as) dying with a surviving copy.  This can be painful to acknowledge, but only for as long as you have traces of the belief in a soul in you.  Eradicate them fully, and (what's left of) you will be set free ;-) 

 

 



#15 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 07 June 2014 - 10:10 PM

Because if we have no spiritualism-other-thing-or-attached-to-universe-thing-spiritualism, and just atoms-materialism, then firstly it's obvious there "is" many of us, and when one goes your gone, others come in and are conscious in their atoms, to come back something needs to basically be left behind then, and no a clone is not able to be the left behind thing because it is not you who was just conscious, it's someone else-another consciousness...

 

Also about if the atoms & other particles are in the right place and then you will suddenly be conscious and believe you are you and on going with a constant consciousness that is effectively...there's one problem I'll show you here, see, if you have another one of this person pop up, and they are in the same boat now conscious too and thinking what your thinking, you both are two seperate consciousnesses...indeed if one dies, the other one will still be conscious and the dead one is not anymore...so if both die and in the future you have aannother one made, it will be another consciousness that's conscious and the two that died will not ever be conscious...so something indeed would have to be left behind...or the other answer is that if another exact one was made beside the first one, it would not be conscious, but that assumes too something is staying forever and only goes in the one....otherwise the sad 3rd answer is a new outlooking thinking consciousness is made each time...this is why I said to stay conscious/alive, we have to stay conscious, we do in sleep too as explained above...yes it probably is a constant form that is staying emerged with no affecting stops, like a kitchen overhanging table staying in shape...


Edited by ADVANCE, 07 June 2014 - 10:45 PM.


#16 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 08 June 2014 - 12:20 AM

Theres a Physicist, F Tipler.  He would argue and as theorised that if the individual aspects of say ADVANCES brain was simulated down to his or her individual detail (neurons, memory proteins etc) say in 2000 years time that would be wakeing up again - i think there for it's me!!

Just to put a bit of an angle on the debate. :)

 

Frank Tipler is kind of a crack pot. His theories include things like trying to argue that the beginning singularity of the universe, the end of the universe, and the duration in the middle are somehow evidence of the trinity inChristianity.


Edited by serp777, 08 June 2014 - 12:20 AM.

  • like x 1

#17 addx

  • Guest
  • 711 posts
  • 184
  • Location:croatia
  • NO

Posted 08 June 2014 - 01:20 PM

As explained, the part of your brain that allows you to be aware of your conscious experience, experience as an object in a context is the part that contemplates these things. This part of the brain allows you to then choose what object and what contexts you like and dislike, handle well or are afraid of etc.  This part of the brain allows you to recognize contexts and become correct objects (for example if someone is in need of help you become the helper as you think this is a good scenario leading to good things).

 

This part of your brain has the ability to think outside the box, outside of you. This part of the brain is connected to imagination so it can process imaginary contexts as well. This part of the brain provides the embedded logic fault of "imagining" infinity(or the entire universe) and then "stepping out of it" as if it were contained, not boundless. So we can never really imagine infinity because the subjective-thinking self is always outside of it, looking at it, so it is always imagined non-infinite. As this part of the brain provides these notions about contexts, it is also "asked of"(by thoughts) to provide a notion about non-existence as a context, but it can not possess a notion about such an experience. The "lack of sense or data or notion" about non-existence causes inability to think how it would be not existing. This causes us to imagine that our "consciousness" (in science) or "soul" (in religion) is something special that exists beyond the material world and we worry where will our "subjective self"(the one that is aware of existence) go after the body dies. When people attempt to imagine being dead they imagine themselves in a coffin, or as a soul floating around or in heaven or reincarnated or whatever. It is always a context of existence rather than non-existence which can not be imagined. This is most revealed if you think that each such "imagining" is in fact seen by a hidden witness, you - your awareness looking at the imagined concept, being there to witness it and to provide a notion of it to your consciousness. So it is always there, just as it is there when imagining and looking at the infinity of the universe, causing the logic fault in thinking.

 

We can not subjectively comprehend that our consciousness is a phenomena arising from the body, that it is an awareness existing within a sandbox provided by neuron networks. Its ability to contemplate, be aware of and understand existence is a consequence of it being evolved to provide better social control. Awareness of self is a social awareness of self, awareness of different social contexts that objectify you into various roles. It is hard or impossible to imagine that our thinking-selves or subjective selves are in fact tools awaken by the body to guide it better, rather than them being masters that were "awarded" a body to control.

 

The meaning of life is therefore lacking as we think we are awarded bodies and lacking purpose, but in fact our subjective selves are a tool executing the bodies needs and as such have inherent purpose, The purpose of the subjective self is to evolve in satisfying the bodies needs which in our species drastically depend on social ability and so require the subjective self to handle this requirement for social ability. The purpose of our subjective self is in fact to guide the body and it is rewarded and punished by emotions depending on how good it does.

 

Point being, we can not subjectively understand this, but simply need to accept that awareness of consciousness is simply an emotion, a sense being fed to your consciousness and the manipulation of it does not ensure any kind of "originality of self". Its purpose is to provide a sense of self as a mechanism, while the originality is stored in your entire nervous system and beyond. This sense (vmPFC) only provides a special kind of access to this originality, a kind of access that provides a notion of self existing.

 

If bodies are cloned, each body will awake its own consciousness and the awareness of it which will then start providing "self-thoughts". Both awareness will think they are the "original you".

 

Thoughts that happen in your head are part of the running sandbox in which you think, this can not be transferred to another body as such as it is a notion upheld by the activity of your brain, by the senses and thought schemas actively feeding this notion. It disappears when the brain is passive. This "subjective self" is simply created/switched on by the body/brain as it awakens as a tool. The issue is that all your self-aware thoughts are stemming from this tool so you imagine yourself to be this tool rather than your entire wholeness. 


Edited by addx, 08 June 2014 - 01:36 PM.


#18 Clacksberg

  • Guest
  • 138 posts
  • 5
  • Location:morecambe. england
  • NO

Posted 08 June 2014 - 02:29 PM

 

Theres a Physicist, F Tipler.  He would argue and as theorised that if the individual aspects of say ADVANCES brain was simulated down to his or her individual detail (neurons, memory proteins etc) say in 2000 years time that would be wakeing up again - i think there for it's me!!

Just to put a bit of an angle on the debate. :)

 

Frank Tipler is kind of a crack pot. His theories include things like trying to argue that the beginning singularity of the universe, the end of the universe, and the duration in the middle are somehow evidence of the trinity inChristianity.

 

 

Yeh. some of his ideas are a little 'Strained';-)

 



#19 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 08 June 2014 - 03:51 PM

Well firstly the purpose of living as in my introduction and as we all know is building heaven one day and being with "your" most attractive partner and best foods, best never ending games, enjoyment, and really exited and very fun, and happy, alot.

 

K um...None of that above still, unless I edit latter after reading a line or two not read, but it all looks I'm sure not answering my problem I just brought up and just looks like on the concept of saying just cause and it all goes together....actually the brain alone could probably still sit and think with no body...there's a consciousness somewhere be held effectively emerged~

 

Another way to say my problem just above I wrote is this I wrote:

In short the answer is "There (is) many of us consciousnesses seperate from eachother and when one dies its dead and others are still conscious but not the dead one anymore, and if you had a exact copy form beside you with both being alive now and duplicates, that proves it wouldn't of course be you and just be another seperate consciousness beside you and so if both of you are dead and your body was created again it would be yet another consciousness and you'd never be conscious ever again"


  • dislike x 1

#20 Clacksberg

  • Guest
  • 138 posts
  • 5
  • Location:morecambe. england
  • NO

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:02 PM

Well firstly the purpose of living as in my introduction and as we all know is building heaven one day and being with "your" most attractive partner and best foods, best never ending games, enjoyment, and really exited and very fun, and happy, alot.

 

K um...None of that above still, unless I edit latter after reading a line or two not read, but it all looks I'm sure not answering my problem I just brought up and just looks like on the concept of saying just cause and it all goes together....actually the brain alone could probably still sit and think with no body...there's a consciousness somewhere be held effectively emerged~

 

Another way to say my problem just above I wrote is this I wrote:

In short the answer is "There (is) many of us consciousnesses seperate from eachother and when one dies its dead and others are still conscious but not the dead one anymore, and if you had a exact copy form beside you with both being alive now and duplicates, that proves it wouldn't of course be you and just be another seperate consciousness beside you and so if both of you are dead and your body was created again it would be yet another consciousness and you'd never be conscious ever again"

 

I'm having trouble trying to digest what you are saying, because maybe english not your 1st language:-)
But we dont have any hard facts on how consciousness works - it's the old 'hard problem'
 


Edited by cactus fast back, 08 June 2014 - 05:14 PM.


#21 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:29 PM

I'm fluently english and only english, and personally that above is very readable, and were getting closer, very closer, ecspecially with me and my things I'v said now, anyhow again here is my last two statements pasted below from my last two replies, two different ways to read it but same thing~

 

 

 

Another way to say my problem just above I wrote is this I wrote:

In short the answer is "There (is) many of us consciousnesses seperate from eachother and when one dies its dead and others are still conscious but not the dead one anymore at the moment, and if you had a exact copy form beside you with both being alive now and duplicates, that proves it wouldn't of course be you and just be another seperate consciousness beside you and so if both of you are dead and your body was created again in the future it would be yet another consciousness and you'd never be conscious ever again, and therefore to stay alive as a consciousness the consciousness being effectively constantly kept emerged by physics as a constant consciousness like a overhanging table at the moment needs to stay as it's effectively constant emerged self~ And a moment of stopping would end you this means~

 

 

 

Because if we have no spiritualism-other-thing-or-attached-to-universe-thing-spiritualism, and just atoms-materialism, then firstly it's obvious there "is" many of us, and when one goes your gone, others come in and are conscious in their atoms, to come back something needs to basically be left behind then, and no a clone is not able to be the left behind thing because it is not you who was just conscious, it's someone else-another consciousness...

 

Also about if the atoms & other particles are in the right place and then you will suddenly be conscious and believe you are you and on going with a constant consciousness that is effectively...there's one problem I'll show you here, see, if you have another one of this person pop up, and they are in the same boat now conscious too and thinking what your thinking, you both are two seperate consciousnesses...indeed if one dies, the other one will still be conscious and the dead one is not anymore...so if both die and in the future you have aannother one made, it will be another consciousness that's conscious and the two that died will not ever be conscious...so something indeed would have to be left behind...or the other answer is that if another exact one was made beside the first one, it would not be conscious, but that assumes too something is staying forever and only goes in the one....otherwise the sad 3rd answer is a new outlooking thinking consciousness is made each time...this is why I said to stay conscious/alive, we have to stay conscious, we do in sleep too as explained above...yes it probably is a constant form that is staying emerged with no affecting stops, like a kitchen overhanging table staying in shape...


Edited by ADVANCE, 08 June 2014 - 06:17 PM.

  • dislike x 1

#22 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 08 June 2014 - 07:50 PM

You mean you're fluent in English LOL. I can't stand to go through your entire post until you clean up some of the run on sentences/improve grammar/make sentences intelligible.

 

Also when things are plural, you use "are" instead of "is".

 

"then firstly it's obvious there "is" many of us,"

 

Then, firstly, it's obvious there are many of us


Edited by serp777, 08 June 2014 - 07:50 PM.


#23 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:04 PM

Stop it, your trying to make anyone coming here not read that answer now above, people...read it...there it is above, can you prove it's wrong now or is this a new discovery?


Edited by ADVANCE, 08 June 2014 - 08:05 PM.

  • dislike x 2

#24 addx

  • Guest
  • 711 posts
  • 184
  • Location:croatia
  • NO

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:22 PM

You didn't reply to my post. It was aimed at the thread topic.

#25 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:16 PM

Stop it, your trying to make anyone coming here not read that answer now above, people...read it...there it is above, can you prove it's wrong now or is this a new discovery?

 

People should spare themselves from reading that monstrosity. Seriously, please work on your English. I'm not trying to be a dick, it's just that your statements literally make no sense and are extremely run on.


  • like x 2
  • dislike x 1

#26 ADVANCESSSS

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 353 posts
  • 18
  • Location:space

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:47 PM

Anyhow I'd like to hear what you's think now about that above if you can prove it wrong or not.



#27 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:59 AM

Ok, I think I can sum up your question as:

 

1. "If an exact quantum level copy of myself is made, how is one different from the other?"

2. "If they aren't the same because one didn't exist prior, why would a cryonicist be the same person or any different than the quantum copy after being thawed?"

 

That is a good question, and we generally answer it with the parallel of a heart surgery or a surgery where the patient is ametabolic and for all intensive purposes dead. That or we use the scenario of someone being saved by CPR after their heart is stopped. 

 

I can't say I can answer that one without doing an observational study. Either both are just as much the original as the original or one is the original and one is a copy. But I wouldn't say that both are copies because one was never made from something else.

 

With exact quantum copies, the only difference is the point of reference and history of travel through the 4 dimensions. Perhaps one is you because it originated as an embryo and the other is just a copy because it didn't learn to be what it is, but rather is what it is and nothing more. 

 

I'll give it some more thought and maybe post further later. 



#28 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 09 June 2014 - 05:43 AM

Ok, I think I can sum up your question as:

 

1. "If an exact quantum level copy of myself is made, how is one different from the other?"

2. "If they aren't the same because one didn't exist prior, why would a cryonicist be the same person or any different than the quantum copy after being thawed?"

 

That is a good question, and we generally answer it with the parallel of a heart surgery or a surgery where the patient is ametabolic and for all intensive purposes dead. That or we use the scenario of someone being saved by CPR after their heart is stopped. 

 

I can't say I can answer that one without doing an observational study. Either both are just as much the original as the original or one is the original and one is a copy. But I wouldn't say that both are copies because one was never made from something else.

 

With exact quantum copies, the only difference is the point of reference and history of travel through the 4 dimensions. Perhaps one is you because it originated as an embryo and the other is just a copy because it didn't learn to be what it is, but rather is what it is and nothing more. 

 

I'll give it some more thought and maybe post further later. 

 

I think it's the most reasonable position to say that the two copies aren't different from each other. They are the exact same consciousness, but neither consciousness has access to each other's thoughts obviously. This resolves the archaic thinking of "where would the original consciousness actually be if nobody knew which person was the clone?" There simply is no original consciousness; let me explain-

 

The most logical answer is that consciousness is not one continuous entity anyways. Each frame of "consciousness" that occurs at each instant is different from the previous consciousness, but has all the previous memories of the consciousness before it. For example, how would you know if you were created 5 seconds ago with the memories of your previous lifetime? You wouldn't, because there is no way to distinguish memories from those that might be false and created outside your existence. So your experience of consciousness is merely an illusion created to convey continuity, which would help members of the species recognize causality of events. Understanding causality is important for the survival of the species. This solves every kind of consciousness issue you could think of, such as atomic transportation, because it shows that no one is ever the same person/consciousness anyways after an instant of recognizable time. People simply assume that consciousness is this kind of static abstract thing. My argument would suggest that it is an entirely physical phenomenon and composed of a timeline of different consciousnesses.


Edited by serp777, 09 June 2014 - 05:46 AM.


#29 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 June 2014 - 06:37 AM

True, but I still want cryonics. The original, or the vessel/partial vessel of the original will likely still have a superior right to exist and/or be reanimated, and it's difficult to know where/what the copy might be made from or whether the "original" would find the copy suitable. 

 

There's definitely more to the argument than can be covered in a few posts or even up to this point considering the other ideas that might capitalize on such thinking and people's ignorance. For instance, if we bring back every possible consciousness that could exist (and assume that it did), would that be ethical? Would we not have to bring back consciousnesses that were in states of suffering or pain and thus potentially create pain and suffering that has never before existed (all possibilities of it is what it is afterall)? Is it acceptable/ethical to cause existential harm to a consciousness such that it weighs down a subsequent but unrelated consciousness? What's the ripple effect? I know what has to be done ensure a healthy and unburdened existence for all without the difficulties we presently face. Do you?

 

I'm sure some contemporaries will see and try to capitalize on an excuse to justify themselves here.



#30 serp777

  • Guest
  • 622 posts
  • 11
  • Location:who cares

Posted 09 June 2014 - 08:00 AM

True, but I still want cryonics. The original, or the vessel/partial vessel of the original will likely still have a superior right to exist and/or be reanimated, and it's difficult to know where/what the copy might be made from or whether the "original" would find the copy suitable. 

 

There's definitely more to the argument than can be covered in a few posts or even up to this point considering the other ideas that might capitalize on such thinking and people's ignorance. For instance, if we bring back every possible consciousness that could exist (and assume that it did), would that be ethical? Would we not have to bring back consciousnesses that were in states of suffering or pain and thus potentially create pain and suffering that has never before existed (all possibilities of it is what it is afterall)? Is it acceptable/ethical to cause existential harm to a consciousness such that it weighs down a subsequent but unrelated consciousness? What's the ripple effect? I know what has to be done ensure a healthy and unburdened existence for all without the difficulties we presently face. Do you?

 

I'm sure some contemporaries will see and try to capitalize on an excuse to justify themselves here.

 

Well assuming my analysis is correct, each new consciousness wants to make their moment of existence better, which means you can establish a utilitarian framework. There's no good reason to do harm either, since it serves no purpose.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: cryonics, question, consciousness

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users