[extropy-chat] Essay on Physical Immortality -economics of access

[Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.]

The live or let die theme is practiced already in terms of pharmacoeconomic
criteria for drug plan access to drugs and priorization of surgeries and other
life saving therapies.  If I recall right, dialysis stops at 65 unless the
client ponies up the cash in Oregon.

The scenario is  that those with the ability and willingness to spend say 100
million will demand and get immediate access to radical life extension and the
middle class will dissallow such costs for their peers is likely an already
accepted fact.

What Kass and Rifkin are doing is using the issue of  banning of potential
radical life extension technologies  for even the rich to hide the fact that the
policy makers have chosen to deny it for the middle class as well.
To allow the  Gates family to live to 250 would incite Joe Public to want the
same right.



Mark Walker wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Samantha Atkins"
>
> > > Well this isn't really Mark's point -- he is simply pointing out that if
> > > the objection to preventing access to life extending technologies
> > > is based on the right to a future -- then abortion is going to
> > > come up in the minds of critics.
> >
> > The abortion argument, or one variant of an answer, was used as the spine
> of the argument presented from what I saw.  Using a somewhat strained
> argument about a different manner in an even more strained way doesn't seem
> optimal.
> >
> > >
>
> While I appreciate your efforts to understand the issues, what you say here
> is conceptually and historically mistaken. The first step of Marquis'
> argument is to provide an  analysis of what is wrong with killing us (adult
> humans). His answer is that in the typical case it deprives us of the value
> of our futures. The next step in his argument is to say that this same
> analysis applies to fetuses. My argument requires only agreeing with him
> about the first step. I go on to apply the analysis to immortal (or emortal
> or ageless--there ya go Damien and Harvey--) individuals. Clearly there is
> at least the logical possibility of agreeing with the analysis of why it is
> wrong to kill us mortal adults, and yet disagree that the analysis applies
> to fetuses. So, there are two conceptually distinct parts of Marquis'
> argument. My argument shares with him only the first step. The first step is
> not an abortion argument by any stretch of the imagination, so you have not
> understood the argument. Historically, the first step of Marquis' argument
> was heavily influenced by Glover and Young, and so it is the least original
> part of his paper.
>
> You have called my argument 'strained', 'suboptimal' and so on. I can't see
> that you have provided any reason for believing this. I realize that you
> don't like the anti-abortion position, but as I have said (and as Robert has
> also in effect pointed out) the issues are logically independent.
>
> >
> > A foetus IS NOT a child.  Ridding oneself of a biological accident before
> it is a human being with rights in order to have reasonable control of one's
> own life and wellbeing is not a case of the mother's rights trumping the
> "child"'s rights.  There is not child.  This is the specious and weak form
> of the argument in its original context of abortion.
> >
>
> This is a gross misrepresentation of his argument. He explicitly denies (at
> least for the sake of the argument) that a fetus or newborns are persons,
> human beings, etc. His argument rests on the claim that a fetus (if
> unharmed) has a future like ours (if we are unharmed). Again you call an
> argument weak and specious without demonstrating even an elementary grasp of
> its basic structure.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> Mark Walker, PhD
> Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
> University of Toronto
> Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
> 15 Devonshire Place
> Toronto
> M5S 1H8
> www.permanentend.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat