3 ms·

Given that the main alternatives (decomposing in a box or being cremated) involve a 0% chance of resuscitation at some future unknown date, cryonics seems like

Given that the main alternatives (decomposing in a box or being cremated) involve a 0% chance of resuscitation at some future unknown date, cryonics seems like the rational choice to make. Alcor has so far shown itself to be a fairly reliable cryonics provider and the sums of money are not extreme - neuropreservation being only $80,000, or a life insurance policy of ~$30-$150/month.

apsec112 9y ago
I'm signed up for cryonics, but to be fair, I agree that it would be irrational if the odds of coming back were 1,000,000,000:1 or something like that. Most people value their lives very highly, but not infinitely.
- joefourier 9y ago
  Depends on the requirements of the 1,000,000,000:1 option. If it's at very little cost to you, and if the alternative is certain, permanent death, the rational choice is still to take the incredibly slim chance of coming back. Otherwise it does indeed depend on the importance you put on your own life. Of course, in the case of cryonics, there is no measurable probability of coming back, so the point is largely moot.
  - Jach 9y ago
    Depends how you measure I guess. If you insist that you need to wait x years and then count how many people were brought back against how many weren't, sure, there's no measure... But you can break the question down and look for evidence about each step, it's not going to be a precise measurement but you can at least start estimating your belief certainty (as well as introducing bounds -- I don't think anyone's justified in a 90% certainty of coming back at this point, but nor do I think there's justification that it's as low as one in a billion). I've always liked http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/break-cryonics-down.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/break-cryonics-down.ht... as one approach to turning the problem into multiple conditional steps.
nylonstrung 9y ago
Even if it fails, if the promise of a chance to be revived at some point allows you or your loved ones to be more at peace with your mortality it seems worth it for the relatively minor cost.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  Having a loved one stuck for an extended time in a maybe-not-permanently-dead-but-probably-so state doesn't seem to give people more peace with mortality, judging by what I've seen of, e.g., people with family members on life support, missing-but-presumed-dead, etc. So, insofar as this is viewed optimistically as something other than a combination of assisted suicide with weird storage of remains, I'm skeptical that it would be psychologically beneficial to the survivors.

apsec112 9y ago

I'm signed up for cryonics, but to be fair, I agree that it would be irrational if the odds of coming back were 1,000,000,000:1 or something like that. Most people value their lives very highly, but not infinitely.

joefourier 9y ago
Depends on the requirements of the 1,000,000,000:1 option. If it's at very little cost to you, and if the alternative is certain, permanent death, the rational choice is still to take the incredibly slim chance of coming back. Otherwise it does indeed depend on the importance you put on your own life. Of course, in the case of cryonics, there is no measurable probability of coming back, so the point is largely moot.
- Jach 9y ago
  Depends how you measure I guess. If you insist that you need to wait x years and then count how many people were brought back against how many weren't, sure, there's no measure... But you can break the question down and look for evidence about each step, it's not going to be a precise measurement but you can at least start estimating your belief certainty (as well as introducing bounds -- I don't think anyone's justified in a 90% certainty of coming back at this point, but nor do I think there's justification that it's as low as one in a billion). I've always liked http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/break-cryonics-down.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/break-cryonics-down.ht... as one approach to turning the problem into multiple conditional steps.

nylonstrung 9y ago

Even if it fails, if the promise of a chance to be revived at some point allows you or your loved ones to be more at peace with your mortality it seems worth it for the relatively minor cost.

dragonwriter 9y ago
Having a loved one stuck for an extended time in a maybe-not-permanently-dead-but-probably-so state doesn't seem to give people more peace with mortality, judging by what I've seen of, e.g., people with family members on life support, missing-but-presumed-dead, etc. So, insofar as this is viewed optimistically as something other than a combination of assisted suicide with weird storage of remains, I'm skeptical that it would be psychologically beneficial to the survivors.