X-Message-Number: 16458
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:14:11 EDT
Subject: Swayze, Perry/Mill

I have been trying for some time to come up with a proposal to him and to the 
 CI Board of Directors to help James Swayze obtain cryo service through CI. 
Still working on it.
Mike Perry mentions Mill's assertion that coercion of anyone is permissible 
only for the protection of others, not for his own help or protection.

That's greatly oversimplified, not to mention that it's merely an opinion. 
Surely you can (and should, if necessary) coerce your child not to harm or 
endanger herself. And if you once admit that, how can you draw a clear line 
between a child and someone who is child-like in certain respects, stupid or 
ignorant or weak? 

An opinion opposite to that of Mill was taken by the various churches, 
especially the Roman Catholics in earlier times. They held--very 
logically--that not only coercion but even torture was permissible for the 
supremely important goal of saving souls.

In the cryonics context, a question is whether you should freeze a relative 
who had not wanted it, if you have that option around the time of his death. 
Certainly a case can be made for disregarding the decedent's wishes.

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16458