I was interviewed about cryonics by Barbara Carfagna, a journalist expert in innovation and future, for “Codice – La vita è digitale” (Code – Life is Digital) aired on RAI, the Italian national television broadcaster. Cryonics aims to preserve the vitrified human body, old or sick, at extremely low temperatures, in the hope of future cures. During our conversation, we explored its promises and challenges, the ethical, scientific, and social implications, asking ourselves what it would mean for humanity if we could effectively prolong life by hundreds of years.
Barbara Carfagna:
From magical rituals to the most daring genetic techniques, pushing the boundary that separates life from death has always been one of the goals of humans and technology. David Orban is a futurist from the school of so-called transhumanism, which considers aging a curable disease. Let’s talk about cryopreservation. There are now many followers of Oscar Wilde who want to compete with nature by freezing their bodies, even in nearby Switzerland, at a cost of 200,000 euros. How would you define someone who entrusts their body to a freezer while waiting for resurrection? You always talk about being optimistic; can we say that whoever does this is at least optimistic?
David Orban:
They are certainly optimistic, and we can illustrate what they decide to do with an analogy developed by writer Tim Urban. When I have a stroke, an ambulance picks me up and takes me to the nearest hospital, which hopefully can intervene. But if what I have is not curable today, then cryonics is like an ambulance through time, taking me to the future to reach a hospital that hopefully will be able to cure me when I arrive.
Barbara:
But are there well-founded scientific reasons to rely on this technique? These 200,000 euros, even if they have created systems to monitor them, are ultimately just handed over, and then you die.
David:
The series of experiments being conducted originally started with cells, then moved on to components of organs or entire organs. Indeed, the goal is to be able to reverse the vitrification of the entire body or even just the brain, because that option also exists.
Barbara:
You come from Singularity University, whose founder, the famous Kurzweil, believes in many things, some refuted by academics, such as the idea that humans can merge with machines or the idea that in a few years we will decode the keys to immortality – he says 7. First of all, if you still hear from him, how is he doing at 76 years old and taking 80 pills a day, and can we really hope for a future where diseases and old age will be eradicated?
David:
Like many of us, even with the passing of years, he is still very active. In fact, after 20 years, his new book has come out “The Singularity Is Nearer.” Having people who are 200 years old among us? Well, it will take at least another 100 years to find out.
Barbara:
So he says things, but we don’t know if they will actually happen, let alone in the times he announces. Steve Jobs, who knew a thing or two about technology, said that death was life’s best invention because it opened up space for new energies. What kind of world are we really heading towards if life were to be prolonged by hundreds of years?
David:
It will be a radically different world. I’m not Steve Jobs, but what I say is, “Your enemies never die.” What does this mean? We cannot have enemies; we can only create a world where we coexist together.
Barbara:
So, will artificial intelligence replace young people? In the sense that those new energies and creativity that Steve Jobs talked about, which are typical of new generations, will instead be replaced by artificial personalities that will help us live as old people forever? Do you think this is a scientific achievement or a world where those already born will replace those yet to be born?
David:
As often, choices are not exclusive. Both things can be true. The flourishing of new energies derived from biological reproduction and the flourishing of new energies from creativity, even non-human, of artificial intelligences. Then it’s up to us to choose how to combine these two forms of curiosity in exploring the universe.
Barbara:
Let’s return to the topic of aging. In your opinion, is it more important to live long or to live better what we have to live, without physical decay?
David:
The choice is very important and interesting because the degrees of freedom we acquire when we can extend life indefinitely must include the possibility of stopping and saying that my dignity is worth more than my efforts to gain another year. So definitely, the quality of life will be something crucial compared to mere duration.