X-Message-Number: 16501 Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 13:13:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Badger <> Subject: Re: An argument for preserving frozen persons David Pizer suggests that we might be able to extend the anti-abortionists' argument that the zygote/fetus "might" be a human to cryonics. But I can't really be selective and use this argument for cryonics and not also use it to support the anti-abortionist view, can I? As I am definitely not an anti-abortionist, what to do? I could probably accept a set of criteria for establishing just when I could reasonably conclude that a mass of cells has become a human. I'm not sure what those criteria would be but I would expect to see a nervous system in place for one thing. Similarly, we should be able to present a set of criteria such that others could reasonably conclude that a frozen body may still be a person capable of being re-animated. I have a friend who is nurse. I recently forwarded Mike Darwin's 3-part article on CPR. She became much more interested in the idea of cryonics as a result, saying that she found the actual mechanics of the process very interesting. The more she learned about suspension protocols, recent advances in vitrification, etc, the more feasible it all seemed to her. So it would seem that education might be the real key to effectively persuading others to look into cryonics. Scott Badger __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16501