Inkstersco, on Jan 19 2010, 06:44 AM, said:
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
Look at MF for example, while it was responsible for the SENS agenda.
Aubrey actually had no shortage of publicity(Colbert, Richard and Judy, etc). But it had been to surprisingly little effect (less than, say, an astronomer explaining how near an approaching meteor is). That's because talk of living xxxx years is cheap, even if it's backed up with some good, general reasoning.
You may be right, but from what I can see it is the exact opposite. Those appearances have had a tremendous effect. I see people every where that have gotten in to this because they saw Aubrey in Tech Review, or on TED, or Colbert, or Barbara Walters, or whatever. In fact it seems to me it may be the single biggest driving factor in the increase of over all interest in this cause over the years, but of course, I could be wrong. I see it reflected in these imminst registration numbers all the time:
I know thats not millions, but thats just imminst, and its growing, and the cause is still increasing through the first stages of its media outreaches.
Anyways, your right, we need to inform them more, and we need to keep the themes straight and workable.
Some of the things developing to that end include this possible 5 year plan that is still tentative and in its basic stages here.
Theres also a few things working to bring us a wider variety of platters to offer the different audiences, such as the Longevity Communities Network that is continuing to develop at Longecity.com. Its mission statement and about section is likely going to be a pivotal peice, at least many of us think that. Then there is also a secondary name for imminst in the works as discussed places like here.
We would retain the name Immortality Institute/Imminst, and we would have another name, this can allow us to continue to appeal to the hard cores, corner the market on the important meme keyword immortality, and use a softer name for appealing to varieties of other crowds. There are a lot of details that will need to go in to the set up. We also have a variety of other crowd targeters in development or planning for consideration. A ton of this is plotted out in basics so far in that 5 year plan. We continue to build that, we're looking to expand the core teams of people working on it, and some parts of it are already being executed. Besides all the projects and sections themselves, one big over all theme is continue to expand. Once we hit 100,000 its going to be harder to resist this cause, then once we hit 1,000,000 it will be even harder, and 500,000,000 even harder, and so on.
The media items need to leave the audience truly changed in some way. 'Shit, I never thought of it like that before'. The way to do this is not to persuade the audience that there's something wrong with them ('you're in a trance'), but to impress upon them, in a single move, the non-trance perspective.
The audience puts their guard up if you begin with an extreme conclusion(we'll defeat aging) and then explain the reasoning. And the audience may feel you're jumping the gun if you start with only with bite-sized reasoning and then move to the extreme conclusion. The third way is simply to impress upon the audience the non-trance perspective, and allow the audience to come to the same moral and practical agenda as us.
From my point of view (I am a non-scientist who was eventually persuaded that SENS had merit) this impression consisted of two main realisations. The moral realisation: That an old man is just an injured young man and that social aging is mainly a lot of needless humbug. And the practical realisation: That the category of injury we're talking about is the kind of thing that we can reasonably endeavour to fix.
It wasn't the moral or practical argument that broke my trance. It was the impression I kept getting from the gradual understanding of the context,
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Thats a main part of what we are working with in a possible 5 year plan, that is still tentative and in its basic stages here.
that broke my trance. That is, factors such as the way things are sometimes worded.
We here take these realisations for granted,
Ha, now your doing it to us, telling us that we are in the "tell them they are in a pro aging trance to inform them trance." but Im glad to see you doing that here because I sometimes do that too, I work on it, this makes me feel less bad.
I know what your talking about, thats exactly what Im trying to push too. I guess maybe you didnt notice it yet because maybe Im doing a good job of 'informing' people that its the way to go, and not telling them that theyre doing it wrong. (maybe not)
and as such, it may not seem enough merely to bring them about. But I thing people who have been accustomed to the life-extensionist point of view may forget just how alien it is to most people, and how slippery and incorrigible the average person is when it comes to this topic.
Exactly, all we have to do is continue to inform them. We cant and shouldnt expect to tell them about it and have them just, jump on board right away. We want to inform them, little by little over time, let it sink in for them, let them reach the conclusions on their own, which in many cases is the only way that a person will accept a conclusion. People dont want to be told what to do, they want to decide what to do. They say that a person usually has to hear about a new concept from around 3 or 4 different sources that they view as at least fairly credible before they begin to beleive it, and I find in my experience that that seems to hold about true. You probably find similar.