Would reviving the past alive be immoral?

[CannonFodder]

Even though it's the sort of thing currently relegated to science fiction there are rare instances of individuals being clinically dead coming back to the land of the living. Such as the Russian guy who was clinically dead for three days and the people in the morgue saw a glimmer of life in his eyes, or other instances of people being assumed dead when in actuality they just perceived as dead. Most of the time they're just misdiagnosed, or on the border of death, or even rarer were dead temporarily. That raises the question of what truly makes a person, "dead" and if we could bring back people from the dead would it be immoral?

There's already people chosing to be cryogenically frozen assuming that in the future they will be brought back. The problem is cellular damage though. If we can figure out a way of repairing cellular damage from freezing then that opens the door to possibly bringing people back. However as it stands now the freezing process damages cells beyond our ability to repair them. Some people go a step further and just freeze their heads taking the chance that they won't need their body in the future.

However that brings us to the connundrum, is death "sacred" and if it were possible to have yourself frozen once dead and be brought back at a later date would you choose to or would to choose to remain dead?

 

[Schwimmwagen]

At its core, the question is essentially asking whether or not it's okay to let people make their own choices in what they do with their lives.

 

[Fallowfox]

I don't think bringing people back from beyond the brink would be immoral provided
-it would be in their best interests, rather than bringing back a vegetative ball of suffering agony.
-it would not be a significant population problem.

I don't want to remain dead. If I could come back in a scenario which was not intollerable agony that would preferable.

Will I be freezing my head? No.

 

[CannonFodder]

Will I be freezing my head? No.

What about freezing your body?

 

[Fallowfox]

What about freezing your body?

Again no. It's expensive and a likely lost cause. Not to mention I should probably surender my body and let other people use my tissues.

 

[CannonFodder]

Again no. It's expensive and a likely lost cause. Not to mention I should probably surender my body and let other people use my tissues.

If you had the money and there was a way to prevent the cellular damage from freezing would you?

 

[Rilvor]

If processes for fast production of food continues to increase, I do not see why not. So long as it was the individual's choice.

Here's a more mindsplitting addition to the discussion:

What if we could, using a process derived from the Immortal Jellyfish, revert ourselves to toddlers by cellular definition would that be too alien? Too wrong?

 

[Fallowfox]

If you had the money and there was a way to prevent the cellular damage from freezing would you?

That sounds better, I'd need more information but I would go with aye-aye. If it turns out that I cannot be restored then my tissues are still useful because they're not damaged.

 

[Ranguvar]

Sometimes dead is better.

 

[Tigercougar]

Nope. When life is over, life is over. I am curious as to how the world will look like in the future, but, eh, so is everyone. And why would I want to be alive knowing my loved ones are dead?

 

[Fallowfox]

Nope. When life is over, life is over. I am curious as to how the world will look like in the future, but, eh, so is everyone. And why would I want to be alive knowing my loved ones are dead?

Perhaps your loved ones could also be revived. Maybe you would get new loved ones.

 

[Tigercougar]

Perhaps your loved ones could also be revived. Maybe you would get new loved ones.

Wouldn't do that to 'em as it's not their choice. I'll stick with the people I know.

 

[Moobelle Thundara]

Just to change the topic slightly I, myself was wondering;

If you died and scientists got a hair or fingernail or anything which had your DNA on it and used it to basically create a clone of yourself, would the clone be you or would it be like a whole different person?

 

[Rasly]

... That raises the question of what truly makes a person, "dead" and if we could bring back people from the dead would it be immoral?

I would say, when someones memory is lost, then this person is dead and there is nothing u can do about it. I don't think that memory can survive freezing, but even if there is a small chance, it is better then nothing.

I personaly would like more the scenario, where people find a way to transfer themself from biological brain to mechanical one or new biological brain, like a "body swap". Theoreticaly, if we findout, how information is being transfered along the brain, be can plug an usb to it and extend it to another device. I think there was something like this, in anime called Ghost in the Shell.

 

[DrDingo]

Well, if I ever died, I would have died for a reason. So if I was brought back I would likely be in pain from whatever killed me in the first place.

 

[Car Fox]

Rather it's immoral or not is different from person to person. For me, it depends on how the person died. For instance, If I was an old man (which I am :V), I probably shouldn't be brought back, regardless of how I died. If I was young like I still am, It'd probobly be O.K., especially if your father throws you into a volcano, because you took his business out from under him, fair and square (Kazuya).

 

[Lomberdia]

Just to change the topic slightly I, myself was wondering;

If you died and scientists got a hair or fingernail or anything which had your DNA on it and used it to basically create a clone of yourself, would the clone be you or would it be like a whole different person?

it would be a separate person all together. Clones start life all over, the only thing they share is genetic make-up, not memories. I read about scientist being able to clone sheep and though it looked like the original sheep, it didn't know the same things as the original. Now if we could download our memories into something and transfer them over into the clone then i would say 'yes' it is another you. not just a look-a-like

 

[Day Coydog]

Here's what I think: as soon as the brain is in no way active, they are temporarily dead, once decay starts they are permanently dead, though, if the brain were damaged during the temporary death then they wouldn't be the same person anymore, so you would have to be very careful.

 

[Schwimmwagen]

Just to change the topic slightly I, myself was wondering;

If you died and scientists got a hair or fingernail or anything which had your DNA on it and used it to basically create a clone of yourself, would the clone be you or would it be like a whole different person?

It'd be a whole different person - your experiences are ultimately what make and shape you.

 

[Dreaming]

Have you ever heard of Petar Plogojowitz? It's a pretty interesting story

 

[BRN]

objectivity

 

[wtfjinx]

Anyone else checked out the Alcor foundation? Kinda creepy.

 

[Sarcastic Coffeecup]

Nah. I don't see death as final. Obviously there can be consequences when bringing consciousness back from wherever it was, but I'd freeze my shit if there was a chance I could see the future I so jizzed on while gorging up sci-fi stuff. So to speak