| Num |
Comments |
Date |
| 1 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 21 |
In question (11) the terms 'the good', 'society' and 'the good of society'
(a) are not defined,
(b) the criteria & context for their definition are themselves not defined,
(c) the criteria & context for who would define them (and on what criteria / context be chosen) are not defined,
(d) is it not stated who is defined as being included in 'society.' |
|
| 22 |
I would suggest adding Unitarian to the religion choices. |
|
| 23 |
Great survey! Much improved from Ver. 1. |
|
| 24 |
|
|
| 29 |
|
|
| 55 |
Typo: Note you need to delete "&apos" from question 5 and some "Don't Know" answers.
Re Question 9: According to the Old Testament Methusaleh lived (I think) 900 years and I think a few others even longer |
2006-03-05 09:08:01 |
| 59 |
|
2006-03-05 16:05:10 |
| 60 |
|
2006-03-05 16:19:45 |
| 61 |
I believe given the past few years of Bush that humanity will most likely go extinct through wars. However if not, mortality will be conquered. |
2006-03-05 16:06:02 |
| 62 |
It was definitely not clear whether #5 and 6 referred to millions/billions of years, or truly infinite. |
2006-03-05 16:40:30 |
| 63 |
|
2006-03-05 17:09:21 |
| 64 |
|
2006-03-05 17:09:22 |
| 65 |
|
2006-03-05 18:04:39 |
| 66 |
(14) Do you believe that cryonics can be practiced
without freezing damage?
This is unclear. Do you mean now, or in theory? |
2006-03-05 18:09:04 |
| 67 |
|
2006-03-05 18:20:59 |
| 68 |
I thought you said there was a 20 minute window for answer to question 16 ? |
2006-03-05 18:03:17 |
| 69 |
|
2006-03-05 18:24:39 |
| 70 |
|
2006-03-05 19:02:30 |
| 71 |
|
2006-03-05 23:44:25 |
| 72 |
|
2006-03-05 23:55:55 |
| 73 |
|
2006-03-06 05:14:32 |
| 74 |
|
2006-03-06 05:20:25 |
| 75 |
|
2006-03-06 05:31:55 |
| 76 |
|
2006-03-06 07:43:55 |
| 77 |
|
2006-03-06 08:32:29 |
| 78 |
|
2006-03-06 08:45:20 |
| 79 |
|
2006-03-06 08:55:48 |
| 80 |
|
2006-03-06 09:27:37 |
| 81 |
|
2006-03-06 09:41:12 |
| 82 |
How is your connection with cryonics accepted by your friends?
Do you express your cryonic connections with your friends and why or why not?
What would you like to do with your life if you could live forever?
Do you believe cryonics is Life Extension, or is it life suspension.
If you could live in good health, and forever, would you still prefer to be suspended now?
What kind of support do you expect to receive after reanimation?
Do you understand what Nano technology is doing now and can do in the future. |
2006-03-06 09:08:02 |
| 83 |
|
2006-03-06 10:44:23 |
| 84 |
|
2006-03-06 11:14:17 |
| 85 |
|
2006-03-06 11:18:02 |
| 86 |
|
2006-03-06 11:21:17 |
| 87 |
|
2006-03-06 11:33:33 |
| 88 |
Q1 - the only possible answer is "Compared to what?"
Q16 - the jump in available answers from "5 days" to "any remains ever" indicates the test creators bias - there are certainly reasonable answers between those two numbers, as after 5 days the brain will not be totally liquified. The prevailing levels of bacteria, insects, or other carnivores, would also be a big factor.
In Q19 I said that there was "Possibly" a god - and in Q21 I identified myself as an Atheist rather than an Agnostic. I have to interpret the word God to mean some sort of creator that other people might be willing to worship. I see evidence of creation in the laws of physics, and am unable to accept a strong anthropic principal, however, I am definitely an atheist, in that I will never worship any being as "God". There are smarter, stronger, more powerful beings than myself right here on Earth, and I don't worship them - why should it be any different with the creator or creators of the universe? |
2006-03-06 11:18:30 |
| 89 |
|
2006-03-06 11:55:41 |
| 90 |
|
2006-03-06 13:00:50 |
| 91 |
|
2006-03-06 13:17:01 |
| 92 |
If you're really trying for logical and scientific *accuracy*, you should avoid terms like "definitly" and "infinite." I know what you're *trying* to ask, but with those terms, there's really no way anyone can select them without invalidating the whole thing. There are alternatives. Using "no limit" was a good start. |
2006-03-06 13:16:40 |
| 93 |
|
2006-03-06 13:24:31 |
| 94 |
|
2006-03-06 13:39:14 |
| 95 |
|
2006-03-06 14:28:03 |
| 96 |
|
2006-03-06 15:29:55 |
| 97 |
"Cut rate of aging in half" is confusing, perhaps "double the current average lifetime of seventy-plus years in developed countries". I think there are some questions that the serveyee should be instructed ty bypass if the answer to "Do you understand the purpose of cryonics" is No... for instance somebody who answered No could likely not give a meaningful answer to "Do most cryonicists use 'immortality' to refer to infinite lifespan." |
2006-03-06 13:39:51 |
| 98 |
|
2006-03-06 15:45:57 |
| 99 |
|
2006-03-06 16:11:32 |
| 100 |
Good survey, Ben. |
2006-03-06 17:43:07 |
| 101 |
|
2006-03-06 17:52:17 |
| 102 |
|
2006-03-06 18:34:55 |
| 103 |
|
2006-03-06 19:22:59 |
| 104 |
This question seems not so useful in it's current form:
(5) Do most cryonicists use the word 'immortality' to refer to infinite lifespan?
If it said indefinite then I'd have said yes. To me immortality is impossible. On the moment the universe or multiverse ended one would find they weren't "Immortal" after all. I do believe an indefinite extremely long life span is achievable.
I don't think cryonics by itself is a Life Extending science but is a Life Saving science. Without other remedies hoped for in future one would still be the same age and frailty as when suspended if thawed and nothing else done. |
2006-03-06 20:01:34 |
| 105 |
Religious Affiliation - Bright
Question 8 is confusing. |
2006-03-06 20:59:19 |
| 106 |
Why has cryonics been unsuccessful? The first frozen was in 1968,: there should be thousands signed up by now, yet there are only a few hundred. |
2006-03-06 22:02:42 |
| 107 |
|
2006-03-06 23:08:04 |
| 108 |
|
2006-03-06 23:25:38 |
| 109 |
|
2006-03-06 23:50:45 |
| 110 |
|
2006-03-07 00:34:58 |
| 111 |
|
2006-03-07 01:42:17 |
| 112 |
|
2006-03-07 02:30:48 |
| 113 |
The only people seriously advocating cryonics and pursuing it are those who see it as the only alternative to obliteration, and value the quality of their lives sufficiently to make the effort to try to continue to exist.
Others are curious, or skeptical without sufficient reason, or so disenchanted with life as to not care if they 'go on', even if they are atheists.
The idea of living on indefinitely is in some ways extremely challenging, because the struggle to maintain oneself even for so long as what we now call a 'normal lifespan' involves challenge, difficulties, and the need to continue to adapt.
In this sense, the quest for endless life is the acceptance of unending challenge, and that is too much for most people in civilization as it now exists, in large measure due to the way they have been socialized by their parents, peers and society in general. |
2006-03-07 04:36:03 |
| 114 |
|
2006-03-07 05:10:20 |
| 115 |
Question 13 is somewhat unclear. |
2006-03-07 05:07:41 |
| 116 |
#18 -- also have arrangements with Alcor. Were I sufficiently wealthy, I would have a fallback structure in place using _all_ present cryosuspension storage facilities.
#17 -- this question is not as precise as it could be. My answer is based solely on my understanding of the limits of technology; however, social factors may of course eliminate the existence of those patients prior to the arrival of the means with which to reanimate them; however, I have no reliable way to measure such factors at present.
#16 -- To be specific, I hold to the information-theory notion of identity, so a proper answer to the question requires knowledge of the fundamental structure of the brain which we don't yet have.
#11 -- I'm a libertarian, and so my real answer to this is to grumble that "society" is an amorphous collective and any concept of "good" herein must involve the individuals who are actually living those lives.
#10 -- I have read it claimed that the Bible asserts a maximum lifespan of 120, though I could not cite the verses used in support offhand. I have no present familiarity with Jewish or Islamic scripture.
#7 -- I'm actually evenly split between "20-30" and "30-40".
#6 -- depends on cosmological data not yet known (for example, is it possible to create "baby universes" into which individuals might move should this universe ultimately be open as presently thought?). Particularly of interest are the questions of whether Tipler is correct about the physical engineering of an (or, rather, the) Omega Point, and Dyson's speculations about indefinite subjective experience derived from finite computations. |
2006-03-07 05:55:15 |
| 117 |
|
2006-03-07 09:02:09 |
| 118 |
|
2006-03-07 09:20:15 |
| 119 |
Sorry haven't been following your posts on the survey - may be this has been discussed already. Or I may be totally off mark. I have a suggestion for questions 14/15 why not provide a popup answer if the person chooses the wrong answer? For example the answer could say something of this sort ( picked from CI site):
Many biological specimens have been cryopreserved, stored at liquid nitrogen temperature where all decay ceases, and revived; these include whole insects, vinegar eels, many types of human tissue including brain tissue, human embryos which have later grown into healthy children, and a few small mammalian organs.
This would correct any misconception/ lack of information right away. I suggested a pop-up as opposed to a correct answer later (if it was ever intended) because a correct answer provided later will be less likely to correct any preconcieved notions.
Dennis
p.s- If you need help with the javascript for popup - just let me know. email - dennisfreethinker (at) yahoo dot com |
2006-03-07 10:20:59 |
| 120 |
|
2006-03-06 12:54:36 |
| 121 |
|
2006-03-07 12:11:10 |
| 122 |
|
2006-03-07 12:19:47 |
| 123 |
|
2006-03-07 12:04:52 |
| 124 |
"Can cryonics currently be practiced without freezing damage" was a bit confusing. I am under the imnpression that the head at least can be "vitrified"--virtually turned into a piece of glass without cellular damage. I also thought that, at this time, you were still working on how to thaw out patients since ice crystals formed between -210 and -180 during thawing.
Also, questions about "infinite lifespans" mix the theoretically possible--stopping aging, defeating disease, etc. with statistical problems like "physical accidents" that will kill you today every 625 years. |
2006-03-07 14:20:11 |
| 125 |
Proposed survey questions:
(1) Cryonics facilities should be relocated to rural locations to reduce the chance that they will be destroyed by warfare or terrorism.
(a) high priority
(b) worthwhile but not of high prioriity
(c) not important enough to justify the cost
(2) Cryonics facilities should have on site a liquid nitrogen plant, a power generator with a large supply of fuel, and staff living accommodations in order to prevent patient thawing if normal services are interrupted by warfare or acts of terrorism.
(a) high priority
(b) worthwhile but not of high priority
(c) not important enough to justify the cost |
2006-03-07 16:44:38 |
| 126 |
|
2006-03-07 17:52:39 |
| 127 |
Re #14: I don't know which interpretation to give to "freezing damage": "Any changes during the cryopreservation process,"
"Irreversable changes," "Harmful changes, by what criteria,"; effect on recovery, etc.
Maybe: "...without irrecoverable freezing damage"? |
2006-03-07 18:45:05 |
| 128 |
|
2006-03-07 19:57:17 |
| 129 |
Hi Ben! Very interesting questions around religion and possible resistance to long lifespans as "sinful." I hadn't considered that at all. Certainly, I think the issues around increasing numbers of people having longer lifespans might have societal impact - not the least of which is on their (greedy) children.
Brian O'Neill |
2006-03-07 21:17:33 |
| 130 |
#4, My 70+ years of experience makes me think it will be difficult to avoid accidental death for 1000 years.
#7 & 17, Purely guesses.
#9 & 10, Don't know and don't care. |
2006-03-07 21:56:56 |
| 131 |
|
2006-03-07 22:54:22 |
| 132 |
|
2006-03-07 23:11:19 |
| 133 |
|
2006-03-08 00:25:20 |
| 134 |
|
2006-03-08 05:41:11 |
| 135 |
Hi Ben, Its a good survey , will be interested to view the outcomes. |
2006-03-08 06:09:30 |
| 136 |
|
2006-03-08 09:02:16 |
| 137 |
I am signed and funded with Alcor and CI as a backup.
Great survey, Ben! :)
Rudi |
2006-03-08 09:54:32 |
| 138 |
|
2006-03-08 11:04:22 |
| 139 |
|
2006-03-09 03:04:30 |
| 140 |
|
2006-03-09 08:14:22 |
| 141 |
|
2006-03-09 10:33:29 |
| 142 |
Oh, it's already been said i guess, but
question (6) really is problematic.
If we take a sort of strict scientific
view point, it's not clear what
experiment we perform to see if
somebody has an infinite lifespan.
So you can't even pose the question,
strictly speaking.
But if you say "we don't need an
experiment, loosen up a little", then
there still may be problems---e.g.,
could time be "curved", somehow,
some effect that we can only observe
after 10^20 years? As Jordan said or
implied, you're asking people to offer
some opinion not just about
(human) development of biological
engineering, but also about the
large scale structure of time or
maybe other exotica from physics.
PS: Hmmmm "Private comments may
be placed in the Question box", but
if the question box has contents,
you must submit an e-mail
address. I guess that's not a
contradiction, but it does imply
that private comments may not
be submitted anonymously. |
2006-03-10 02:05:00 |
| 143 |
|
2006-03-10 21:30:24 |
| 144 |
Thank you for writing this interesting survey. |
2006-03-11 18:46:53 |
| 145 |
|
2006-03-14 20:42:10 |
| 146 |
|
2006-03-15 09:42:13 |
| 147 |
|
2006-03-15 10:02:45 |
| 148 |
|
2006-03-15 10:22:43 |
| 149 |
|
2006-03-15 12:26:44 |
| 150 |
|
2006-03-15 12:58:32 |
| 151 |
|
2006-03-15 15:08:14 |
| 152 |
|
2006-03-15 15:27:43 |
| 153 |
wannabeepoet was here. |
2006-03-15 16:13:08 |
| 154 |
|
2006-03-15 17:38:17 |
| 155 |
|
2006-03-15 18:52:57 |
| 156 |
The question "Do you believe there is a God" is a bit vague.
Some religions believe in "Gods". Others believe themselves to be Gods. Some believe in Spirits, others in aliens, God-like beings such as dragons, titans, etc. Does "God" refer to some omnipresent unknowable divinity that Christians speak of? Does it refer to the divinity with which Egyptians, Mayans, Incans, Chinese and Japanese (among others) saw their rulers? Does it include the Native American beliefs in spirits of the sky, the wood, the mountains, and in animals?
It is not clear that the question would be interpreted as encompassing the almost unlimited variation exhibited in human religions and in non-religious ideas.
There is also the question of what "belief" means. Some extremely religious types may also state that they "know" of a God, but do not "believe" it.
I would be inclined to either rephrase the question to more precisely state whose version of "God" is the subject matter here, change it to a more general question of "Do you believe in a God" (multiple choice: Yes, Monotheistic; Yes, Polytheistic; Yes, Myself; Yes, God-like spirits or entities; Agnostic; Atheistic) or eliminate the question entirely. |
2006-03-15 20:31:02 |
| 157 |
|
2006-03-16 07:32:28 |
| 158 |
|
2006-03-16 10:06:19 |
| 159 |
|
2006-03-16 13:00:56 |
| 160 |
|
2006-03-16 15:13:50 |
| 161 |
I see cryonics as a back-up plan to a problem that is currently being researched. Basically if I can live healthy and well enough to be alive when prolong life is achievable I will content. Until then I am not a complete optimist and see that cryonics offers a good means of avoiding destruction by premature death. It is not a solution, however, it is the only other option in our current system. |
2006-03-16 20:19:35 |
| 162 |
|
2006-03-20 16:05:44 |
| 163 |
|
2006-03-21 02:47:14 |