Another celebrity death

Another celebrity death

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

July 18th, 2009, 1:01 am #1

As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/us/18 ... ml?_r=2&hp
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2006, 4:20 am

July 18th, 2009, 5:21 am #2

just don't get the wrong brain!


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 2nd, 2004, 8:27 pm

July 18th, 2009, 6:34 am #3

As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/us/18 ... ml?_r=2&hp
Why should we care, if people so obviously intelligent, perceptive, and wealthy, do not bother to sign up for cryonics at least when it is close to their time?

I would find it hard to believe that Walter never heard of the cryonics option.

He probably succumbed to the usual reasons people choose to irrevocably terminate their lives at "death". Of course they mostly do not think it through so far as to being that.

I was a big Cronkite fan in some of his time, and felt a sense of loss when he retired. I feel no more a sense of loss that he has died. I wonder why that is.

There will be other, more and less gifted, presenters of the "news", coming in our untold futures. Let us remember Walter when we see them.

What goes around, comes around, so it is said. Perhaps the alternate realities posed by some will give personality to future entities who will approximate Walter in some uncanny fashion.

OK I'm done,

FD
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

July 18th, 2009, 4:18 pm #4

just don't get the wrong brain!


Bill, here's a story for you...

A rogue cryonicist goes around stealing the heads of the recently deceased. The cop/detective hero keeps trying to track him down but he's too crafty.

Eventually he is caught and gets the death sentence for desecrating bodies, but the heads are never seen again. They freeze his body in accordance with new state law, as all criminals' bodies have to be used for scientific experiments or organ donation. Eventually reversible cryopreservation is invented thanks to this, and it becomes commonplace. The hero gets shot and is preserved for a future treatment.

Finally they all wake up in a space station, swap notes and have a few good laughs.

So... Comedy or thriller?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 30th, 2006, 1:38 am

July 18th, 2009, 4:28 pm #5

As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/us/18 ... ml?_r=2&hp
"As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved."

Some of Mr. Cronkite's friends and relatives probably think the same thing about your soul, and you can't prove they are wrong about a spiritual afterlife, any more than they can prove you are wrong about the possibility of Alcor to wake up cryopreserved persons, in the future. You might not want to accept it, but MOST people will think Alcor was just scamming someone's family out of part of their inheritance.

It's really disturbing, to me, to see cryonicists wanting to inflict their desires on others. It really does make cryonics seem like a "cult," or a "religion." If you want others to be tolerant of your wishes for yourself, at the time of your legal death, you really should learn to be more accepting, and tolerant, of the personal wishes of others.

You keep stating Mr. Richardson's last wishes should have been respected, but it's HIS fault they weren't. You also keep stating you don't think this shines a bad light on Alcor, but I believe you are wrong. The idea of Alcor digging up Mr. Richardson, after he has been in the ground for about five months, because they think they might be able to revive him in the future, will only make most people (continue to) think cryonicists are a bunch of lunatics. I, personally, find it utterly ludicrous. FD is right; Alcor needs to modify their contracts, so that they don't feel they are contractually bound to make themselves, (and the cryonics community, as a whole), look like a bunch of ghoulish idiots.

Alcor should have used the Richardson situation to educate their members AND as an impetus to step-up their efforts to assist their members in completing the proper legal documents. How often did they contact Mr. Richardson? When was the last time they contacted him? Did they even give a damn about him, before the family asked for the $50K back?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

July 18th, 2009, 4:31 pm #6

Why should we care, if people so obviously intelligent, perceptive, and wealthy, do not bother to sign up for cryonics at least when it is close to their time?

I would find it hard to believe that Walter never heard of the cryonics option.

He probably succumbed to the usual reasons people choose to irrevocably terminate their lives at "death". Of course they mostly do not think it through so far as to being that.

I was a big Cronkite fan in some of his time, and felt a sense of loss when he retired. I feel no more a sense of loss that he has died. I wonder why that is.

There will be other, more and less gifted, presenters of the "news", coming in our untold futures. Let us remember Walter when we see them.

What goes around, comes around, so it is said. Perhaps the alternate realities posed by some will give personality to future entities who will approximate Walter in some uncanny fashion.

OK I'm done,

FD
The sad thing is that seeing him not care will support this bizzarre cultural phenomenon of millions of people not caring.

The reasons you give -- he was well-off, was intelligent, had heard of it, and certainly knew it was coming -- are the very reasons I feel sad about it. Michael Jackson was maybe a bit of a loony, perhaps he didn't know it was coming. But Walter Cronkite? Surely he could have done something.

Not more incredible than, say, Douglas Adams not being in stasis. But still really weird.

On the brighter side, a Cronkite-like AI or "guided clone" should be relatively easy to manufacture based on the amount of footage there is with him in it. Not like it will be him, but at least you can watch the news and feel nostalgic. :P
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2007, 8:16 am

July 18th, 2009, 6:55 pm #7

Why should we care, if people so obviously intelligent, perceptive, and wealthy, do not bother to sign up for cryonics at least when it is close to their time?

I would find it hard to believe that Walter never heard of the cryonics option.

He probably succumbed to the usual reasons people choose to irrevocably terminate their lives at "death". Of course they mostly do not think it through so far as to being that.

I was a big Cronkite fan in some of his time, and felt a sense of loss when he retired. I feel no more a sense of loss that he has died. I wonder why that is.

There will be other, more and less gifted, presenters of the "news", coming in our untold futures. Let us remember Walter when we see them.

What goes around, comes around, so it is said. Perhaps the alternate realities posed by some will give personality to future entities who will approximate Walter in some uncanny fashion.

OK I'm done,

FD
Right on. Cronkite was a religious person. He was intelligent and well educated and experienced in life. He also had a firmly established beliefs of religion and afterlife. Who are we to dictate and force our beliefs upon him? In our opinion (may I add, not scientifically proven) he may have made a mistake. But it was solely his decision.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 6th, 2004, 6:46 pm

July 18th, 2009, 7:47 pm #8

As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/us/18 ... ml?_r=2&hp
one time around is enough, not that there's any great conspiracy against cryonics.

Besides, depending what you believe, you either going to live forever at the side of Jesus, or come back again anyway.




"As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved."

Saved like leftovers in the freezer perhaps...

Why do the true believers feel the need to force their beliefs on others as the only way, rather than just happily accepting them for themselves? I've always wondered that...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 6th, 2004, 6:46 pm

July 18th, 2009, 7:48 pm #9

"As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved."

Some of Mr. Cronkite's friends and relatives probably think the same thing about your soul, and you can't prove they are wrong about a spiritual afterlife, any more than they can prove you are wrong about the possibility of Alcor to wake up cryopreserved persons, in the future. You might not want to accept it, but MOST people will think Alcor was just scamming someone's family out of part of their inheritance.

It's really disturbing, to me, to see cryonicists wanting to inflict their desires on others. It really does make cryonics seem like a "cult," or a "religion." If you want others to be tolerant of your wishes for yourself, at the time of your legal death, you really should learn to be more accepting, and tolerant, of the personal wishes of others.

You keep stating Mr. Richardson's last wishes should have been respected, but it's HIS fault they weren't. You also keep stating you don't think this shines a bad light on Alcor, but I believe you are wrong. The idea of Alcor digging up Mr. Richardson, after he has been in the ground for about five months, because they think they might be able to revive him in the future, will only make most people (continue to) think cryonicists are a bunch of lunatics. I, personally, find it utterly ludicrous. FD is right; Alcor needs to modify their contracts, so that they don't feel they are contractually bound to make themselves, (and the cryonics community, as a whole), look like a bunch of ghoulish idiots.

Alcor should have used the Richardson situation to educate their members AND as an impetus to step-up their efforts to assist their members in completing the proper legal documents. How often did they contact Mr. Richardson? When was the last time they contacted him? Did they even give a damn about him, before the family asked for the $50K back?
Good write up
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

July 19th, 2009, 3:22 am #10

"As I write, his body is probably fresh enough that he could be saved."

Some of Mr. Cronkite's friends and relatives probably think the same thing about your soul, and you can't prove they are wrong about a spiritual afterlife, any more than they can prove you are wrong about the possibility of Alcor to wake up cryopreserved persons, in the future. You might not want to accept it, but MOST people will think Alcor was just scamming someone's family out of part of their inheritance.

It's really disturbing, to me, to see cryonicists wanting to inflict their desires on others. It really does make cryonics seem like a "cult," or a "religion." If you want others to be tolerant of your wishes for yourself, at the time of your legal death, you really should learn to be more accepting, and tolerant, of the personal wishes of others.

You keep stating Mr. Richardson's last wishes should have been respected, but it's HIS fault they weren't. You also keep stating you don't think this shines a bad light on Alcor, but I believe you are wrong. The idea of Alcor digging up Mr. Richardson, after he has been in the ground for about five months, because they think they might be able to revive him in the future, will only make most people (continue to) think cryonicists are a bunch of lunatics. I, personally, find it utterly ludicrous. FD is right; Alcor needs to modify their contracts, so that they don't feel they are contractually bound to make themselves, (and the cryonics community, as a whole), look like a bunch of ghoulish idiots.

Alcor should have used the Richardson situation to educate their members AND as an impetus to step-up their efforts to assist their members in completing the proper legal documents. How often did they contact Mr. Richardson? When was the last time they contacted him? Did they even give a damn about him, before the family asked for the $50K back?
Some of Mr. Cronkite's friends and relatives probably think the same thing about your soul, and you can't prove they are wrong about a spiritual afterlife, any more than they can prove you are wrong about the possibility of Alcor to wake up cryopreserved persons, in the future. You might not want to accept it, but MOST people will think Alcor was just scamming someone's family out of part of their inheritance.

There is a large gap between a spiritual afterlife via miraculous intervention and a re-continued life via technological advancement after a period of temporary unconsciousness. The afterlife proposed by religion is alleged to be eternal, perfect, and guaranteed. Cryonics observes that our mortal and imperfect existence can possibly be made significantly longer and better through technology. The conditions religion imposes for attaining eternal bliss have no rational basis, whereas cryonics is based on the science of arresting irreversible decay in the brain itself. The religious afterlife itself has no demonstrable reason for existing -- it is alleged to be the perfect creation of an incomprehensible God: Cryonics is based on the idea that the future of the human race may include many substantial improvements, like the ability to reverse cryopreservation damage and regrow lost tissues.

We are comparing extremely rational ideas with extremely irrational ideas. Regardless of if both or either is right or wrong, we're talking apples and oranges here.

As to the perception of scamming families out of part of their inheritance, I doubt there are many sincere adherents to this position. Inheritance is a gift, not a payment. To think that families have a certain amount "coming to them" upon someone's death is like thinking a child has a right to a certain amount of christmas presents. While families may indeed feel this way when a rich uncle is about to croak, it is far from being the mainstream, socially-approved consensus regarding inheritance.

It's really disturbing, to me, to see cryonicists wanting to inflict their desires on others. It really does make cryonics seem like a "cult," or a "religion." If you want others to be tolerant of your wishes for yourself, at the time of your legal death, you really should learn to be more accepting, and tolerant, of the personal wishes of others.

If I was in a burning building with several other people, and there was one escape route that I thought might work, I would certainly want to "inflict" my desire for survival via that escape route upon them. The simple and obvious motivation for doing so is that if I did not, I would anticapte that my survivor's guilt afterwards would be far worse. I do not think anyone has a personal wish to die sooner rather than later -- I think rather that they experience a certain social and emotional pressure that they are uncomfortable challenging. For most people, not choosing cryonics is a matter of irrational phobia, not positive faith in a better alternative.

Far be it from me to be uncomfortable with the idea of religion or evangelism. There are as many religions as there are people in the world, and I happen to be very religious in my own way. I have ideas that are not shared by everyone else, many of which I feel are worthwhile enough to propagate. If they weren't good enough to be worth propagating, I would be searching for better beliefs. Of course, if anyone has a really good objection to my beliefs, I am willing to reconsider or adjust them.

If you are disturbed by my apparent lack of respect for Walter Cronkite's personal religion that might have forbid him from practicing cryonics, maybe you misunderstand my intent here. The fact is that celebrities, in addition to the incredible wealth and power they tend to accrue, also have a certain responsibility (whether they choose to accept it or not). Because whatever they do becomes news, and other people tend to think about and copy or base their opinions on it. So if a celebrity -- any celebrity -- decides not to cryopreserve, they are having an influence on millions that may cause them not to cryopreserve. This could in turn cost millions of lives. It is not simply personal anymore -- the large number of people being affected makes it a public matter.

That doesn't mean I expect to sue them or anything. But I do feel I have grounds to publicly criticize, since it affects the people who are aware of the celebrity and might feel inclined to follow in their footsteps. My criticism is not intended towards them as a person, but as a celebrity -- as a figure of standing in society.

I honestly believe that it is a flawed decision to not cryopreserve, not based merely on my own personal beliefs, but based on some of society's most fundamental and widely accepted standards. We live in a very anti-murder, anti-suicide society. If we carry that ethic to its logical conclusion, failure to make use of cryonics as a potential medical intervention is a legitimate and dramatic abberation from things that our society so loudly purports to accept.

The only explanation that seems to consistently make sense as to why society is resistant to cryonics is that it is too used to relying on irrational phobias in the area of how to handle the issue of evident death. It seems obvious to me that most in our society would choose to cryopreserve if they did not have a huge complex of irrational phobias and fears telling them things such as that they might be conscious of something negative during the process (like being a decapitated head or being cold), that they "should" leave the entirety of their estate to such socially approved activities as relatives and charity, that they have a "duty" to die within the first 120 years of their life, etc.

I don't think these are merely personal matters. They are a symptom of something wrong -- a deficiency of rational self-reflection, perhaps -- in our society as a whole. The more we talk about it, the more likely these issues will get out in the open, and people will make more rationally driven decisions on the matter.
Quote
Like
Share