X-Message-Number: 12659 Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 00:21:07 -0700 From: Mike Perry <> Subject: Cryonics Optimism vs. Pessimism In the recent discussion of optimism vs. pessimism about cryonics, the idea is brought out that thinking that cryonics already is likely to work could be a bad thing because it encourages complacency. Personally, I don't see it that way. I remain cautiously optimistic about even present-day freezing methods (some reasons are given in my book)--and I'll acknowledge that the pessimists like Mike Darwin and Eugene Leitl may be right after all. But basically, I don't think optimism in any way precludes a feeling of the urgency and desirability of doing more research, and developing reversible brain cryopreservation if at all posslble. We certainly need to *know* that some procedure will work, rather than just speculating as has been done for 30+ years now. But beyond this, the development of demonstrated, reversible cryopreservation would, I think, trigger a paradigm shift in world thinking that is hard to imagine. It might take a little while to take effect, but the effect would be profound, with death no longer the "finality" it has been seen as since time immemorial, but instead something under human control. The legal repercussions alone would be immense. Failing to cryopreserve preserve the dying could be recognized as a form of murder, as it would be. In any case I think we could expect, after things stabilized, a far more favorable public response to what we are trying to do, with much more support both for those involved in research and in providing services. And all this could depend on a few people in a privately funded lab tinkering with ice blockers and the like. With that in mind, there is certainly every reason to press forward with this research. Mike Perry Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12659