X-Message-Number: 9113
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #9094 - #9104
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 00:01:07 -0800 (PST)

Hi again!

It's way past my bedtime and I should be asleep, but Cryonet is tempting, you
see.

Clearly Ettinger and I have different views of the foundations of probability.
My problem with anything which is simply a systematization of our intuition is
that intuitions vary --- as cryonicists well should know, seeing all those who
believe firmly that cryonics is impossible. My own model begins with the idea
that we first find a set of independent events, and then with these, and
possibly with empirical knowledge of their probability of occurrence WITH 
RESPECT TO ONE ANOTHER (as in a set of cards, the independent events must also
give ALL possible events of the kind we choose to consider) we can then go
on to calculate probability of various combinations of these.

Basically I'm trying here to keep intuitive ideas of probability as far away
as possible. Sure, we can never empirically prove a probability, but we can
at least start with a large number of trials compared to the number of possible
events. And just how large may even be a matter of intuition, but it is better
controlled.

The major problem with simple intuition here is that it fails to answer 
those who have DIFFERENT intuitions. And for cryonics, that is a major problem.
At least for those who want to use probabilities.

As I have said already, I think that probabilities are irrelevant to cryonics
anyway. We are not playing with dice, nor with quantum mechanics (two different
kinds of probability). We are thinking about the worth of cryonic suspension
to us and those we like or love. And our supposition: that we have "a good 
chance" that technology will exist to revive us, at some unspecified future
time, is really just intuitive. If we want to argue it, it's really better
to simply admit the intuition and argue for THAT, with out any smoke about
probability.

To Dr. Strout:
What do you mean by uploading? Into what? With what machinery/devices/biotech?

If it is possible to recover the information specifying ME (or you), then 
why should it remain impossible to recover, repair, or recreate us as we were?
We will have our DNA, and the ability to regrow whole bodies or brains. If 
it is impossible to recover that information, then uploading too becomes
impossible. (To clarify: the information specifying ME is not just my DNA,
but the original state of my brain prior to my "death" and suspension).

Certainly you may wish to argue that we can be improved (somehow) by uploading
rather than restoration. But that is a separate issue entirely.    

			Best and long long life to all,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9113