X-Message-Number: 9709
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:22:36 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #9703 - #9708

Hi again!

The issue of "death" has clearly played a large role in the response of
many people to cryonics. At the same time, most cryonicists refer to the
status of a suspended patient as if they aren't exactly alive, but 
in some new status ("deanimated", etc).

After a long consideration about this issue, I would suggest that we
openly argue this issue differently than before. We can say not that 
suspension patients are in some third state, but that WE believe them
to be probably alive. This would be followed by the simple observation
that the notion of "death" has moved around a good deal already, and
clearly seems to depend on just what medical abilities may exist at
the time.

If a suspension patient is alive, then there is no issue about the
fate of that patient's soul. If the patient is dead, then there is
still no issue, and BY DEFINITION we will never be able to revive them.
We would point out that our notion of death, unlike that of many
current medical authorities, is absolute and does not depend on the
state of medical technology. A person is "dead" if no technology at all,
not just present technology, will ever be able to revive them. Examples:
those whose brains have been literlly destroyed ie. nothing remains.
Moreover by pointing out that there are people whom we would agree     
cannot be revived, ever, we may seem a little less hubristic in what
we wish to do. Our difference is not that we believe we can revive
the "dead" but that we believe in a different definition for death
in the first place, and make no claim that we can revive "dead"
people when they are dead by our more absolute definition.

Finally, I hardly believe that this will solve all our problems in 
recruiting! I just think it might help a bit.

			Best and long long life,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=9709