immanuel Kant proposed the categorical imperative. A categorical imperative is a command without conditions. Kant rejected hypothetical imperatives , these are commands with conditions (e.g. It is ok to lie when trying to protect someone).
The exmaple above would have been disapproved of by Immanuel Kant. Kant believed we should :
The exmaple above would have been disapproved of by Immanuel Kant. Kant believed we should :
- Act in such a way that you would will your actions to become a universal law. What would the world be like if everyone did this?
- Treat other people always as an end, never as a means to an end. Everybody has intrinsic (good in itself) value. Making a person happy is quite different from making them good.
I think that Kantian Ethics would not allow Cryopreservation as it is a hypothetical imperative. When Cryopreservating, there is still the risk that you may not be resuscitated back to health, making the theory of cryonics a hypothectical imperative.
One thing to bear in mind, would be that you are dead by the time that this would occur. Although Cryopreservation is not a universal law, if we think of it in this perspective, there is nothing wrong with making Cryonics a universal law, nor do we face the problem of it making people unhappy, unless they disapprove. Kant would have agreed with the view that we shouldnot allow Cryopreservation, due to its uncertainty as it makes it a hypothetical imperative.
One thing to bear in mind, would be that you are dead by the time that this would occur. Although Cryopreservation is not a universal law, if we think of it in this perspective, there is nothing wrong with making Cryonics a universal law, nor do we face the problem of it making people unhappy, unless they disapprove. Kant would have agreed with the view that we shouldnot allow Cryopreservation, due to its uncertainty as it makes it a hypothetical imperative.