X-Message-Number: 5598
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 11:20:06 -0800
From:  (Dwight G. Jones)
Subject: Re: CryoNet #5592 - #5597
References: <>

Robert Ettinger wrote:

> 3. Thanks to Dwight Jones for his kind words; but it may be slightly useful
> to follow up a bit on the Church of Man and identity of (identical) twins:

> 
> Now a couple of obvious comments on the Church of Man. In practical terms, it
> seems very unlikely to me that you will get adherents if you emphasize the
> tenet that identity resides in genetics and that identical twins are the same
> person. Of course, institutions have been built on even more questionable
> foundations, so we can't be sure; and you may have other things to offer,
> such as agreeable companionship. But it is unlikely that you will get much
> sympathy on this list, or that you will help cryonics, if you are selling
> just a cheap save-your-DNA program (along with ethical/spiritual precepts).

I see all of our efforts as being part of a continuum of services. Each 
organization contributes a function which it conceivably performs best. 
I do not expect sympathy from this list, as I comprehend its subject 
matter and raison d'etre.

As for a it being a "cheap save-your-DNA program", I'm sure that sawing 
off a person's head could be viewed as unsavoury as well, not to mention 
the sequence of procedures necessary therafter. And, no, Cryonics 
doesn't have them filling the stadiums yet either. But neither option is 
a game for proselytizing, and large numbers of adherents are not 
required. Just dedication by a few, that's all we need.
 
> In fairness, the notion that clones are all one person isn't so much harder
> to swallow than the idea that complete duplicates, separated in time or
> space, share identity. It is even difficult on a logical basis to understand
> why ordinary continuers--say myself hours or years later--should be
> considered "really" the same people. The "philosophical" problems have NOT
> been solved (not to my satisfaction, anyway), and it seems possible that the
> individual survives only for a subjective moment, probably less than a second
> in objective time, with continuers being close relations, becoming less close
> with every tick.
> 
> I do NOT believe that identity or survival criteria are arbitrary, with
> individual choice to be respected. I think there is probably one correct
> view--but we don't yet know what it is.

A very nice summary, especially about clones (twins) living 
concurrently. That's our central philosophical issue. Eventually all of 
our tissues must be replaced, brain and all. Since that is the case, 
what is the ESSENTIAL difference between successful cryonic rebuilding 
and regeneration from DNA seed? What is it about today's memories that 
we MUST them to deem ourselves successful in this venture?


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5598