Re: Real Decisions based on QTI

From: Marchal <>
Date: Mon Jun 28 07:30:38 1999

Russell Standish wrote (last week):

>The second issue is in relation to euthanasia. I used to be in favour
>of this, on the basis that I grew up on a farm, and understood the
>phrase "putting it out of its misery". However, the process of
>attempting to kill someone is only likely to increase their suffering
>in those worlds where they survive. So now I'm against euthanasia, at
>least until someone can convince me they can control the outcome of
>the "merciful death" well enough to ensure that the patient is almost
>always in a better world because of it.
>On the same vein, it would take a lot of convincing to get me to ge
>through one of Bruno Marchal's teleportation devices.

It would take a lot of convincing me either. I guess you know this
doesn't change the conclusion of the thought experiments.

Russell Standish wrote also:

>I agree that QTI seems to imply both heaven and hell are in the here
>and now, and which version of eternity you experience depends on how
>you conduct you life (maybe Christians have got it half right!).

>> [BM] QTI justifies a "death" as smooth as possible. It is natural
>> to think that, in a society where Quantum (or comp) immortality
>> will be believed by the general public (if ever), euthanasia
>> will be the rule (after all, [cf Russell Standish]).
>Except that I think I was implying the opposite conclusion (Euthanasia
>is a form of torture).

I know. But I'm still astonished. By definition "eu-thanasia" is supposed
mean "soft-death". With comp/MWI there are reasons to think that it is
the very
way we die wich could influence the immediate quality of the
So, in case you are dying+suffering, euthanasia could perhaps
prevent your going in hell.
And for the same reason, when you say the version of eternity you
experience depends on how you conduct your life, I really would like you
to be true, but I'm afraid that with comp/MWI only the quality of the
last instants will determine the quality of, let us say a significant
initial segment of that *eternity*.
(Note that some taoist seems to have similar believes).
I have no definite opinion on these matters, I would be very glad if
 you are correct, but at this stage, it seems to me that your saying
is not justified neither by comp nor MWI, and may even be in
contradiction with it.

Received on Mon Jun 28 1999 - 07:30:38 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST