Kevin's Watch

--A

Avatar wrote:I wonder why the three currently active threads in here are "Greed," "Fear" and "Depression."

Oh, I've thought about it!

I think it's partly because it's so common to the human experience.
I think post-modern assumptions threaten to isolate people, each in their own pseudo-solipsistic world.
But we want to connect with others; we want dialogue.
And these facets of human nature are things we can all SEE, and we can each bring our piece of the picture.

And because people here ...in some ways... are willing to look at darker side of human nature.
I mean, we read a series of books where the first major act the main character does...

And because there's so many great ways to attack describing the problem:
There are analytical ways.
There's the "nailing down a definition."
There are the methods of philosophy and psychology.
And there's... ("ta-daaaa!") storytelling...
...Sharing the personal experience of human evil:

• sometimes others'.
  sometimes our own.

Another question along those lines:
In general, what seems to make a thread in The Close "work," anyways?

I don't think it's so much that we're "willing to look at" the darker side. I think it's that so many here seem to live there. I've been repeatedly amazed to larn that yet another of you has gone through X or Y, or is on medication for Z. I truly have the good life, being free from what seems to be daily intense emotional pain.

Suffering builds character.

--A

Fist- i dunno; I think that under their well-kept-up exteriors, a lot of people endure more private pain that we'd guess.
I feel like I, too, am one of of the lucky ones, though...

Can you just imagine starting a thread on "Character" or "Love" though?
Seriously...

The answers we give to questions are as much about what we can learn about ourselves, as about the questions themselves. here's a simple one. For a two week expenses paid holiday to a destination of your choice, would you be prepared to pull the wings from a butterfly. [If your answer is no then how about if you had to step on a cockroach.]


But this is'nt my question. My question is as follows:-

Much of the work done in respect of cryopresevation of humans for resucetation at a later point is done on people at the point of death, who hope to be revived at a point where their currently fatal illnesses will be curable and done away with. This is hardly the best situation for the process to be sucessfull in - but there is another way. Work done on animals in the laboratory and on humans who fall into water etc and become hypothermic, is advancing toward the point where it will be possible to rapidly cool an individual to the point where they go into a long term stasis from which it will be possible to revive them at almost an unlimited time in the future.

Question; You are approached by a reputable bio-physics company who offer you the following contract. Following sucesfull trials on primates and vegetative humans, they are ready to perform the first trials on a healthy and normally functioning human. They are pleased to say that you fit their requirements to a T and will thus offer you the following. You will be paid a sum of $10 million, half of which will be paid to you [or your family should you die] following a trial in which you will be placed into hypothermic stasis for a period of one year. The remaining half will be paid to your family following a period of two years and at which time you will report to their offices to be placed into stasis for a further 1000 years. Upon waking you will work for the 'company' providing them with detailed knowledge of the world of 2014. Do you accept the offer?

Since they can't know I could be woken after 1,000 years without physical and/or mental degredation; and they can't know that the company won't have gone under by then, with me and my freezer simply being unplugged, then thrown away fifty years when someone decides to clean up that part of the city - no. If there was a way to know for certain that it would play out as in your scenario, I'd surely be tempted. But still, no. I have children, who I want to see grow, and whose children I want to see.

It was to adress the children aspect that I added the financial inducement. Without children it's a no brainer [isn't it?] - the being the guinie-pig for the first stage buys you the chance to see the world in 1000 years time. Sure - stuff could go wrong and a bird in the hand etc...... But 1000 years in the future - I mean c'mon!

peter wrote:The answers we give to questions are as much about what we can learn about ourselves, as about the questions themselves. here's a simple one. For a two week expenses paid holiday to a destination of your choice, would you be prepared to pull the wings from a butterfly. [If your answer is no then how about if you had to step on a cockroach.]

Nah, I wouldn't do either, I'm happy where I am. If I could just get the money I'd spend on such a vacation, though, I'd think about killing the cockroach.

Question; You are approached by a reputable bio-physics company who offer you the following contract. Following sucesfull trials on primates and vegetative humans, they are ready to perform the first trials on a healthy and normally functioning human. They are pleased to say that you fit their requirements to a T and will thus offer you the following. You will be paid a sum of $10 million, half of which will be paid to you [or your family should you die] following a trial in which you will be placed into hypothermic stasis for a period of one year. The remaining half will be paid to your family following a period of two years and at which time you will report to their offices to be placed into stasis for a further 1000 years. Upon waking you will work for the 'company' providing them with detailed knowledge of the world of 2014. Do you accept the offer?

Hah, that's an interesting question! I think I'd say no. I really think my mom and dad would be crushed by this, they probably don't need the money. If it wasn't for them, though, or if they gave me the ok, I'd definitely want to do it, the work I'd do for the company seems like it would be interesting.

Of course, providing knowledge about the world as it is would be a job far beyond my purview, so ethically I'd have to refuse and suggest one of my more politically aware college friends (or maybe my high school friend who works for the times) if one of them were interested.

The butterfly/cockroach thing tells [most of] us that we care more about the destruction of beauty than of life - or that we value beautiful living creatures more than plain ones. Such is the case of course with humans where if an atractive person looses their life in an untimely manner it is presented [in the media at least] as more tragic than if an ugly person does. This alas is human nature.

The future one probably divides us up into those of us who are prepared to risk what we have today in return for a prize that we may or may not realise tomorrow. Clearly if the stakes are high enough some of us would take the gamble. I would definitely take the chance. I'm nearing 60, have had a good life to date and am fired by a relentless curiosity to know what humans will achieve over the next 1000 years. If we go back to the stoneage or even do not survive at all then I won't have lost much. Alternatively I could win the jackpot of whatever longevity or rejuvination processees are available at that time [who knows - maybe even travell back in time to see my family.