X-Message-Number: 7482
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 12:24:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: Uncaring Cryonicists

Randy Smith wrote:

> For some reason, this image about uncaring cryonicists seems to be out
> there. 

Yes, because a cryonicist (such as myself) assumes he is so unique and
wonderful, he is worthy of being preserved, and subsequently resusciated
(presumably by other people who share his opinion of himself), long after
everyone else has decomposed. Maybe this is hubris, or maybe it's simple 
desperation, but to the outside world I think it looks like hubris.

>  But this image persists. I propose we do something about it. I have
> recently posted on Cryonet a message describing the workshops planned
> by the Cryobiology society aimed at teaching cryobiologists how to
> cryopreserve endangered (certain-to-be-extinct) plants. As I recall,
> they plan to freeze them for the future, in order that the genetic
> heritage of those species not be lost. Sounds very altruistic and
> caring, and maybe even practical.

An unfortunate example, Randy. I know the person who originated the idea
of freezing plant/insect species, and I have reason to believe that his
ulterior motive was to encourage the general idea of preserving life by
freezing it, hence validating cryonics, hence increasing his own chances
as a cryonics case. I am also reminded of another "pure scientist" who
passed through New York a few years ago on his way to address a group of
researchers at a very large corporation, in an effort to convince them to
work on a certain kind of highly exotic and speculative computer research.
Why? Because the person concerned believed that computation power of this
order would be needed to analyze and reconstruct freezing damage on the
cellular level, in particular in his own brain.

Now, I don't see anything wrong with this. I would have done the same, if
I'd been smart enough to think of it myself. I think the problem here is
your assumed distinction between altruism and self-interest. Acts that are
taken "selfishly" (for survival or profit) can in fact be highly
beneficial to society. If I do something to increase my own chances (such
as designing a new piece of cryonics equipment) clearly it may benefit
many other people like me.

I also believe that high-profile do-gooders (e.g. Mother Theresa) are 
really doing what they do because it makes THEM feel good, while at the 
same time they can actually do a lot of damage (e.g. by promoting a 
belief system that discourages birth control).

So ... it's not a simple question, in my mind. I do think that many 
cryonicists are primarily focused on themselves, but I don't think this 
is necessarily bad, and speaking personally, I have received more 
psychological support, generosity, and encouragement from my cryonics 
friends than from others. I have also seen significant acts of kindness.

Regarding your plan to promote the concept of freezing species: I have to 
ask, are you doing it for the species, or for cryonics? And if you want 
to promote cryonics ... now what could the reason possibly be?!

--Charles Platt


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7482