[extropy-chat] Re: Aging as a function of bone marrow degradation

[Harvey Newstrom]

On Nov 12, 2005, at 5:26 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:

> --- mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote:
>
>> Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Which brings me once again to the question:
>>> if I[...]rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow,
>>> can I rejuvenate[...]my bone marrow[...]?
>>
>> This is a circular, tautological question that
>> assumes its own answer before it is asked.
>
> Not at all.
>
>> If we assume that we can tweak bone marrow to extend
> lifespan,
>> would this allow us to tweak bone marrow to extend
> lifespan?
>
> Puleeeze!  I assume nothing.  I ask a question.  And
> to the extent that it suggests a possibility, I ask if
> that possibility seems reasonable.  To wit: Suppose I
> culture myself some "rejuvenated" bone marrow.  By
> "rejuvenated" I mean composed of cells without
> shortened telomeres or nuclear or mitochondrial DNA
> errors.  If I then replace my "old" bone marrow with
> this "rejuvenated" marrow, is it reasonable to
> suppose, theoretically, hypothetically, that I might
> achieve a restoration of youthful vigor in the
> functionality of my new bone marrow, and consequently
> a life extension result, a re-juvenation?
>
> Hope that clears things up, though frankly, I thought
> I was clear the first time.

Yes, I understood it the first time.  Nothing has changed.  I hope I 
can make myself clear this time.

Your starting point is; "if I rejuvenated bone marrow"
Your ending point is: "resulting in rejuvenated bone marrow"

Your starting point is the same as your ending point.  Your final 
question is whether you have the thing you started with.  No matter how 
wide the territory in-between, you end up where you started.  Hence, a 
circle.  Your entire if...then...therefore sequence is a circular 
argument where the conclusion statement at the end exactly matches your 
premise statement at the beginning.

Your logical premise and conclusion boil down to "assuming I have X.... 
do you admit I have X?"  This is a self-defined logical construct whose 
answer must always be "yes".  You answer your final question with your 
beginning premise.  No one can say you can't end up with rejuvenated 
bone marrow, because your first sentence , because the premise that is 
to be assumed answers the question at the end.  It is a well-known 
logical fallacy known as circular logic.

If you really can't understand the above, then let me simply answer 
your question:
If you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, you will indeed end up 
with rejuvenated bone marrow as you say.
But if you can't rejuvenate bone marrow as you say, then I don't 
believe you can rejuvenate bone marrow as you say.
Does that answer your question?

--
Harvey Newstrom <HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP