[extropy-chat] Re: Agreement on technical matters

[Eugen Leitl]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 09:57:30AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> At present I don't try to cite evidence to support my opinion on
> cryonics I just collect it when I come across it. My reason for this
> is that I think that what originally draws people to explore cryonics
> (myself included) is not truth-seeking but hope. 

Of course. This is the reason why cryonics is in its current 
sorry state.

There's no interest to drive the science behind it. We've been through here
before, but I'm repeating the statements (because nobody reads the archives,
anyway).

The community is not supportive. It's not a business.
 
> When people use their reasoning skills to fortify their hopes rather 
> than to try and find out what is true "evidence" tends to be looked
> at as an obstacle to be gotten around not something to be weighted. 

There's no evidence. Because that'd take a few years of work, and a bit of
money. Lacking a focused project, the progress is glacially slow (but
progress there is).
 
> Its possible that most cryonics supporters may not be able to
> dispassionately weight "evidence" in the absence of an emotionally
> favourable alternative solution. I don't know that. 

I notice your entire posts doesn't contain a single pointer to a single
paper. Basically, you're just reiterating your opinions.

You might want to read a few from http://www.21cm.com/abstracts.jsp
(there's more in the works, by the way, stay tuned).
 
> Until there is a framework into which evidence and arguments for
> and against can be evenly weighted I don't want to feed a
> rationalisation process. It takes too much time to do that and I don't
> get any return on time invested.  I'm mortal, I value my time. 

I've blown somewhere between 2-5 years of my life to figure out for me
personally, whether cryonics is a question worth asking. 

I think it is.

I don't consider these years wasted, though it sure damaged my career
bigtime.

If there is any lesson from this I have to give it's: don't let transhumanism
get in the way of your career. Get on with the program, and work from inside
the system.

If you think it might be applicable to you: unsubscribe from this list
immediately. And won't come back, you hear? At least, not until you're done.
 
> Damien doesn't seem to be around at present but what I was hoping
> to explore was whether it would be possible for people on opposite
> sides of the "can cryonics work?" issue to advance-agree on any sort
> of third-party judging process.  

Who's going to do the work? Who's going to pay for the work?

Talk is cheap.
 
> ... 
> I don't know if "what is identity?" is outside judgement 
> informed by the best scientific evidence and the most careful
> consideration of logical argument though.  

There is no identity problem. Most people can't follow the argument line,
though.

Now here's an opportunity to waste oodles on time on angelic pinhead 
dance choreography.

For somebody else, though. Preferrably, off-list.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050318/73ad9cc1/attachment.bin>