I think that there could be arguments made that sponsoring cryonics research could be useful outside of its implications to you personally. For instance, maybe if continuity of life is super important, then it could be worth paying for lots of other people to be signed up, or maybe its promotion would encourage people to think longer term.
If we bought cryonics for others then we should start with the most high-profile, high-impact people who we can expect to accomplish the most over their lifetimes. In those cases it might make a lot of sense.
Utilitarianism is pretty simple in theory so there should only be three relevant questions here:
Well how much value is your labour contributing per year?
How much extra labour would you expect to do if you subscribe for cryonics, in net present value?
How much does it cost, in net present value?
If you take a broader rational approach, then the fact that it lets you live longer is always handy.
I think that there could be arguments made that sponsoring cryonics research could be useful outside of its implications to you personally. For instance, maybe if continuity of life is super important, then it could be worth paying for lots of other people to be signed up, or maybe its promotion would encourage people to think longer term.
I’m not arguing from implications to you personally, I’m arguing that you should keep yourself alive for reasons other than that.
Buying cryonics for others is pretty left-field but maybe it could be justified.
If we bought cryonics for others then we should start with the most high-profile, high-impact people who we can expect to accomplish the most over their lifetimes. In those cases it might make a lot of sense.