X-Message-Number: 16417
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 18:43:01 -0700
From: Mike Perry <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #16405, 7, 8

>Message #16405
>From: "Joseph W. Morgan" <>
>Subject: Memory Retention
>Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 10:06:57 -0700
>If someone is placed in cryostasis  what will he remember upon reanimation?

That is a presently unanswered question, but we (the more optimistic among 
us) are hoping longterm memory at least will survive.

>...Does the complete cessation of electrochemical activity in the brain 
>wipe it of memory like the RAM in a computer is wiped clean on 
>shut-down?  Or is there some form of permanent storage?

I think there is good evidence for permanent storage; cold-water drownings 
are a case in point. Maybe someone will comment who knows more about this.

>Message #16407
>Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 12:09:07 -0700
>From: Olaf Henny <>
>Subject: Questions to Mike Perry and Louis Epstein:
>And to Mike:
>Forgive me if this is too personal, but does anybody in this
>sawdust dry atmosphere of Cryonet ever consider *SEX*.

I'm sure they do. Personally, I live a celibate lifestyle and sex is not so 
important. But I support the right to choose here as elsewhere.

>I am unabashed to state, that to me it is one of the greatest
>pleasures in life and one of the primary reasons to enjoy and
>extend life.  For that I need a biological body with a healthy
>endocrine system and the sensuous feel of touch on my skin.  I
>cannot consider a solely cerebral existence in a computer or
>artificial body as equivalent to the life I have now.

On the other hand, "don't knock it till you''ve tried it"--or at least know 
more about it. You have certain notions of what it would be like existing 
in an artificial device. Machines are cold and emotionless, right?--and you 
don't want that. What devices of the future may be like, though, is another 
matter. And, despite certain rumblings to the contrary, I don't see people 
being forced into choosing or not choosing the options that will become 

>   Yes I have
>heard of direct stimulation of the pleasure centres of the brain
>etc., but I have yet find any ersatz product, which equals the
>original, be it whipped topping, saccharin/cyclamate, fake fur or
>fake leather.

In 100 or 200 years though, it may be different. Also, I think when you 
focus solely on fidelity of imitation you may find that no imitation is as 
good as the real thing. But you also have to consider whether the 
"imitation" is not actually better in its own right. As one case in point, 
the clock started out as an imitation sundial and was arguably inferior but 
now has far surpassed its "original." The same could be said of many other 

>Message #16408
>Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 16:26:56 +0000 ()
>From: Louis Epstein <>
>Subject: Strehler;Modification;Religion;Death
>I note that Dr. Coles has now posted an obituary of Prof.
>Strehler at http://grg.org/charter/BLStrehler.htm
>(includes a link to Strehler's homepage at fihg.org).
>A shame he didn't live to see the mortality of mortality

I certainly agree.

>On 2 Jun 2001, CryoNet wrote:
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message #16400 Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:13:24 -0400
> > From: Thomas Donaldson <>
> > Subject: CryoNet #16394 - #16399
> >
> > ...
> > But clearly we won't want to carry ALL our memories around with us
> > ALL THE TIME. So we might choose to have many different memories,
> > to be used when we need them. ...
>I might be interested in ways a brain can increase capacity,
>but not in the form of anything removable.

I have to say too that I am not keen on the "removable memory" idea. 
Memories should be conveniently accessible at all times--within the limits 
of practicality. But if you are going to be literally immortal, your 
memories must grow without limit (to avoid the "eternal return" problem of 
revisiting the same mental states over and over) and thus long seek times 
seem unavoidable.
>(With regard to security...is everyone here aware of the British
>legislation requiring people to hand over encryption keys when
>the government requests,and forbidding them from revealing that
>they have done so,both on pain of prison?)

I didn't know about this!

> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message #16401 From: "John de Rivaz" <>
> > Subject: Re: CI compared to Religion
> > Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 15:14:59 +0100
> >
> >...
> > I suspect any cryonics organisation requiring members to file statements
> > of assets or income and pay a percentage wouldn't get many members.
>With regard to the occasionally suggested foundation of
>a cryonics-oriented religion,I suppose this inhibition
>would be overcome for any who didn't mind that concept to
>begin with.

The Society for Venturism, which endorses and promotes cryonics, is legally 
recognized as a religious organization in the U.S. (see the website 
http://www.venturist.org, especially "About Us"). We (I'm a director) 
haven't yet gotten to the point of asking our membership to tithe or file 
statements of assets or income, however.

>I do think,however,that such a religion,with a creed of
>defying death and decay at all costs and forbidding/condemning
>the slightest lapse in the preservation of one's body,
>would have to be firmly hostile to the "right to die" notion
>to have a consistent moral code.(And I certainly couldn't see
>joining it if it weren't).

Once again, you have an issue of freedom to choose versus what is "right" 
in a more general sense. The Venturist organization certainly doesn't 
advocate euthanasia or suicide as they are usually understood. But it does 
favor the idea of premortem cryonic suspension in the case of a 
brain-threatening illness, and also supports freedom of choice more 
generally, so that it is not hostile to "right to die" legislation. It 
seems that a great deal hinges on that strange word "right" which can be 
both an adjective meaning "correct" and a noun referring to something one 
ought to be entitled to.

>A religiously based cryonics organization/cryonically-based
>religion would see suspension facilities as the proper
>alternative to cemeteries,much as Hindus use cremation pyres
>and Zoroastrians leave bodies to decay in the open.By
>belonging to a religion and being classed with cemeteries
>(even though the eternal hope of revival was part of the
>religion) they would presumably be tax-exempt.For
>appearance's sake the particular units might perhaps best
>be underground,which might make sense from an insulation

Generally the idea of associating cryonics with cemeteries has proved to be 
a "can of worms" (more literally and in more ways than I care to think) and 
has been avoided since the days of Chatsworth.

>Meanwhile,Imogene Coca has joined the dead.
>When will we the living be...as in the title of Pohl's book...
>"outnumbering the dead"?

A good question.

Mike Perry

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16417