15 replies to this topic

[brokenportal]

Over the years, discussion on ImmInst forums has addressed the integration of advocacy and research for unlimited life spans into K-12 and college education. Possible approaches include the following:

* Giving speeches
* Setting up interactive informational booths
* Donating books
* Setting up clubs
* Influencing and talking to school boards about incorporating life-extension science into the curriculum
* Arranging for classes on life-extension science to be taught

It seems that we may be able to make a good case for building a more comprehensive and long-term goal involving schools.

Are grades K-12 and all levels of college good venues for most new cutting-edge science? I tend to agree with those that say “No.” I would love to see a discussion on it. It seems like, overall, we want students to focus on building and strengthening basics like method, technique, documentation, falsifiability, etc. Then, when they do get into more cutting-edge concepts, they are more prepared to deal with them and get the ideas right, conserve resources, access the right data, and pursue the best avenues.

I don't completely agree, however, that early education is not the best place for new science. Some concepts are so important, so new, and relatively unexplored that they need for us to introduce them now so that their fundamental importance can begin guiding the thoughts of potential supporters now.

This is true of unlimited life spans. If the basic philosophy behind this goal – that it is good to want to conquer the blight of involuntary death – is true, then, it seems, it is true that we should want to introduce this concept in schools as early as feasible on most if not all levels. Of course, kids are still looking to grasp onto ideas, which they will build upon and incorporate into their lives, for the rest of their lives. This cause is so vital, imperative, and time sensitive, that we need many more researchers dedicating their time to this cause as soon as possible. Time is of the essence for the millions of people who are succumbing to the ravages of aging every month. It is not always easy bringing undergraduates and researchers on board. If we can help inspire just one or two schools, let alone fifty or a hundred, to begin thinking about the best ways and angles to incorporate this cause into their curricula, whether that be as a part of a science class, a whole course, or via other courses like sociology and philosophy -- this could be an important step. The more kids throughout K-12 and college education are educated to start opening their minds to the prospects of unlimited life spans, the greater the percentage of critical unlimited-lifespan advocacy and research support will be generated.

In order to do that, a platform for communicating the pros and cons, the reality, and the road ahead for the prospects of unlimited life spans will likely need to be established. It is important to teach the reality that unlimited lifespans are fundamentally valuable. It is also vital to educate people that this cause is another natural extension of society and that it conforms to the scientific method. Our researchers are expected to be peer-reviewed, to publish their work, and to follow the same methods as everybody else.

Because enterprising may not be called for most of the time, this can make it easy to overlook the reality that it is called for some of the time. Work for unlimited life spans is one of those times. We don't want to rush into applied science, but we don't want to be forever focusing ever more on pure inquiry while our chances to apply our knowledge go unharnessed to our detriment. As an example, one thing that contributes to aging is a buildup of lipofuscin in our lysosomes. One of the rare lysosomal storage diseases, Gaucher's disease, has been addressed through applied science, and now thousands of people are living normal lives despite having the disease. Yet some still continue to classify the contributing factors of aging as too premature for their accumulation of surrounding scientific knowledge.

As stated in the beginning, this seems to be because of a difference in fundamental philosophy, and not an absolute need to go through more scientific inquiry before we decide that launching this cause is right. Indefinite life extension is not too cutting-edge when it is part of your fundamental philosophy, that conquering the blight of involuntary death is desirable. Here, the same principle is at work as the one that motivated those scientists who understood the tragedy and misery that comes with Gaucher's disease. These scientists worked to start making a difference, and they succeeded. Likewise, to combat involuntary death, it is possible to make a difference and to make it now.

A major difference between the two efforts, a reason why we can argue that it can be injected into schools at all levels, is that we all experience aging. Exploring indefinite life extension starts with accepting the imperative fundamental importance of working to defeat it.

Edited by brokenportal, 03 January 2011 - 02:36 AM.

[niner]

There are pros and cons to addressing young kids. On the one hand, if they hear the idea that maybe death doesn't have to be inevitable before they've internalized the idea that it is, then they won't need any convincing later in life. OTOH, deathist parents would freak out that someone was trying to inculcate their precious child's mind with such scary ideas. Some of them would have an absolute cow, and before you know it there would be a bunch of preachers and Republicans coming to the school board meeting with pitchforks. It might be better to aim at the college level, when people aren't legally children any more, and are open to new ideas anyway.

[The Immortalist]

To reach kids, just create a futuristic/fantasy tv show or RPG video game with the central concept about extending life spans being desirable.

[brokenportal]

There are pros and cons to addressing young kids. On the one hand, if they hear the idea that maybe death doesn't have to be inevitable before they've internalized the idea that it is, then they won't need any convincing later in life. OTOH, deathist parents would freak out that someone was trying to inculcate their precious child's mind with such scary ideas. Some of them would have an absolute cow, and before you know it there would be a bunch of preachers and Republicans coming to the school board meeting with pitchforks. It might be better to aim at the college level, when people aren't legally children any more, and are open to new ideas anyway.

Would you say that we could not win out in such a situation, or that it would most likely occur to a great degree? Would you say that when it comes to spreading the word, that common sorts of confrontation (as opposed to something like an L. Johnson sort) like you describe are bad sometimes, bad about half the time, or bad most of the time? Would you say it is worth trying to avoid those kinds of potential confrontations at the expense of the discussions and open dialog that it might have otherwise generated?

Edited by brokenportal, 30 November 2010 - 06:21 AM.

[robomoon]

Education about extending lifespans not before college level? What the _)(**& is going on here, even the thought of a TV show or RPG video game about immortality instead of school education about such a matter is -|":>> me off! Certainly, it is practical when college students are learning to become aware about chemical substances that can be patented and bio-screened to make it into working components of aging intervention pharmaceuticals.

Nevertheless, I also want my kids to know they have plenty to learn from primary/elementary school teachers and secondary school teachers who are filled with great advice about indefinite physical life extension in response to aging interventions. If some kids fail to accomplish high school level, they would be missing college anyways. That failure should not mean adios immortality to them.

There are pros and cons to addressing young kids. On the one hand, if they hear the idea that maybe death doesn't have to be inevitable before they've internalized the idea that it is, then ...
//cut//

Would you say that we could not win out in such a situation, or ...
//cut//

Edited by robomoon, 07 December 2010 - 10:41 AM.

[Marios Kyriazis]

This subject must be introduced into schools, but perhaps under a different banner intitially, say, 'Learn how science is helping you stay healthy for longer'. Then, more cutting edge science and developments can be introduced.

This general subject has benefits that work the other way too. For example, if young children of today learn about the science of unlimited lifespans, this will inevitably help achieve unlimited lifespans because, as some theorists suggest, the transition from the exiting society stage to a stage of 'global integration' (through conscious human effort) is, in itself, a cause that extends lifespans.

A way forward, at least in the UK, is to see if more formal courses that have a slant towards the biology of aging can be incorporated in the existing curriculum.

[robomoon]

At least in elementary schools as usual, it seems as if topics being called science would not be much demanded by anyone who teaches biology basics. 'Learn how science is helping you stay healthy for longer' will not be an optimal introduction to immortality and extended/unlimited lifespans.

Oh, maybe I did not noticed you are looking at these extraordinary private schools with full inclusion classrooms for highly gifted children, right? So they sure are coping with science. Thus, one can always bring this scientific topic to those children.

But here is also a suggestion to bring it where all those average kids are getting educated: just call it 'wise teaching' about wise older people (wisely interested in longer lifespans). This will be about old people and those who are wise enough to talk about how aging can probably be delayed. Actually, there is a bearded man who is not so very old, but also wise. No, young pupils, he is not telling tales, he is really doing what is called wise teaching. No, not a guru as http://wiki.answers...._a_wise_teacher is teaching us.

This subject must be introduced into schools, but perhaps under a different banner intitially, say, 'Learn how science is helping you stay healthy for longer'. Then, more cutting edge science...
//cut//

Edited by robomoon, 07 December 2010 - 10:15 PM.

[cranquar]

I wonder, does any one know of a particular curriculum design of instruction for any grade levels, be it primary, intermediate, or college level courses?

Also, what global, or local processes are in place to win the minds of the young to reach for immortality, that are outside of our individual family members?

Are these present endeavors of Immortality Institute? What do you have in place? I'm interested in participating in this regard, and would love to be of assistance.

CQ

[brokenportal]

They all, or most of them at least have the basics of language and math at the top, and then science and social studies on the next tier down with a variety of other classes to but those are the basics. I dont know what different styles, methods, variations and things there are but I would sure love to.

However I do know that I dont know of fallacy being taught in schools and it wasnt comprehensively taught in mine if at all. In the social sciences, the idea would be to develop goals and create a whole order of classes to fit in with the curriculum. Something along the lines of: fallacy 101, fallacy 102, critical thinking 103, fallacy 201, fallacy 202, debate 203, etc...

For winning the minds, there is general press coverage for the cause, of whom Aubrey is doing the best job to date. Then there are things like the mprize and the 300 designed to help get breakthroughs here so that the news will cover these profound new breakthroughs thereby spreading the message to the world. Then there are general outreach projects, and a 6 point plan that is developing that aims to inform a mainstream number of the world with in 5 years. One place you can get involved on the coming together of that plan is here: http://www.imminst.o...plan-to-inform/

Add me in skype if you have that. My id is brokenportal. We use mostly text chat, and sometimes audio.

[robomoon]

Children should learn from history lessons about an early chemistry named alchemy and its goals. While the quest for gold was leading to a discovery of porcelain, all the searches for an elixir that could prolong life did not resulted in something that much useful. Modern chemistry has delivered some better research that could be the fountain of one healthier anti-aging elixir. Pharmacy is getting tested much better these days.

Some sources like the Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology, by the Gale Group, Inc., should not be directly introduced to young pupils. However, the subject Elixir of Life http://www.answers.c...lixir-of-life-2 contains some interesting tidbits to spice up history lessons, such as:

There was no standard method of manufacturing the elixir of life. In the grimoire, Le Petit Albert, for example, one is instructed to use eight pounds of sugar of mercury as the foundation of such a mixture. Fifteenth-century alchemist Bernard Trévisan said that dropping philosophers' stone into mercurial water would create the elixir. The great sixteenth-century physician Paracelsus has vaunted the metamorphic resources of his Mercury of Life which not merely rejuvenates men but converts metals into gold. In the De Tintura Physicorum (1570), ascribed to him, there is a description of a tincture that enabled individuals to live for centuries.

I wonder, does any one know of a particular curriculum design of instruction for any grade levels, be it primary, intermediate, or college level courses?
//cut//

Edited by robomoon, 15 December 2010 - 09:04 PM.

[brokenportal]

Robomoon, a big difference is that elixirs and alchemy and such things are replaced by science. We couldnt teach that elixirs and alchemy might be able to do the job, but we can teach that science could do the job because we already know that we can do recombinant dna splicing, and design enzymes, work in cells, alter their machinery, cure some diseases etc... We can teach that. Then also, if there wasnt any science yet, and in addition to the science, there is the philosophy of indefinite life extension. If people are taught to think about it, and want it, and think that its alright to think about it and want it, then that is just as, if not more important. In fact, by the teaching of its potential across the centuries, that, many say, might be the reason why science evolved in the first place.

Edited by brokenportal, 23 December 2010 - 12:01 AM.

[G. Stolyarov II]

Eric,

I have looked over your initial post, and here is the version incorporating my editorial suggestions. Mostly, I have done stylistic and grammatical editing, because I want to preserve the entire content of your message here just as you intended it. I interpret your post here as a discussion-starter, and so we want all of these ideas to be out there to stimulate further thinking. You can see my suggested version below the dotted line.

I see that you have also gotten some other feedback, but I hope that my comments on the substance of this discussion will also be helpful.

* I am extremely fond of the idea of a game that can portray indefinite life extension in an attractive light. Such a game can be a great motivator for later more formal discussion and exploration of the ideas in classrooms or on the kids' own initiatives.

* I also like the idea of creating an online curriculum regarding indefinite life extension. The curriculum should be freely accessible to all and should have various levels of complexity, from the very basics of the science and philosophy involved to the most advanced topics (e.g., the biological mechanisms targeted by each component of the SENS strategy). The curriculum should be based entirely on free resources that can be found online – and, to be sure, there are many. Then teachers and professors would be able to refer to any part of the curriculum to supplement their courses. There should also be a self-study path, preferably one with interactive quizzes and other activities that directly involve the student.

I have created several extensive online study guides for advanced subjects, mostly economics and actuarial science, which you can see here. For promoting indefinite life extension and making it attractive, I recommend more structured and interactive approaches than what I have done. However, my work has been quite low-tech and so should be easy for others to replicate with regard to this subject.

* A possible candidate infrastructure for creating an online tutorial or course on indefinite life extension can be found at Alekese.com.

Sincerely,
Gennady Stolyarov II

--------

Over the years, discussion on ImmInst forums has addressed the integration of advocacy and research for unlimited life spans into K-12 and college education. Possible approaches include the following:

* Giving speeches
* Setting up interactive informational booths
* Donating books
* Setting up clubs
* Influencing and talking to school boards about incorporating life-extension science into the curriculum
* Arranging for classes on life-extension science to be taught

It seems that we may be able to make a good case for building a more comprehensive and long-term goal involving schools.

Are grades K-12 and all levels of college good venues for most new cutting-edge science? I tend to agree with those that say “No.” I would love to see a discussion on it. It seems like, overall, we want students to focus on building and strengthening basics like method, technique, documentation, falsifiability, etc. Then, when they do get into more cutting-edge concepts, they are more prepared to deal with them and get the ideas right, conserve resources, access the right data, and pursue the best avenues.

I don't completely agree, however, that early education is not the best place for new science. Some concepts are so important, so new, and relatively unexplored that they need for us to introduce them now so that their fundamental importance can begin guiding the thoughts of potential supporters now.

This is true of unlimited life spans. If the basic philosophy behind this goal – that it is good to want to conquer the blight of involuntary death – is true, then, it seems, it is true that we should want to introduce this concept in schools as early as feasible on most if not all levels. Of course, kids are still looking to grasp onto ideas, which they will build upon and incorporate into their lives, for the rest of their lives. This cause is so vital, imperative, and time sensitive, that we need many more researchers dedicating their time to this cause as soon as possible. Time is of the essence for the millions of people who are succumbing to the ravages of aging every month. It is not always easy bringing undergraduates and researchers on board. If we can help inspire just one or two schools, let alone fifty or a hundred, to begin thinking about the best ways and angles to incorporate this cause into their curricula, whether that be as a part of a science class, a whole course, or via other courses like sociology and philosophy -- this could be an important step. The more kids throughout K-12 and college education are educated to start opening their minds to the prospects of unlimited life spans, the greater the percentage of critical unlimited-lifespan advocacy and research support will be generated.

In order to do that, a platform for communicating the pros and cons, the reality, and the road ahead for the prospects of unlimited life spans will likely need to be established. It is important to teach the reality that unlimited lifespans are fundamentally valuable. It is also vital to educate people that this cause is another natural extension of society and that it conforms to the scientific method. Our researchers are expected to be peer-reviewed, to publish their work, and to follow the same methods as everybody else.

Because enterprising may not be called for most of the time, this can make it easy to overlook the reality that it is called for some of the time. Work for unlimited life spans is one of those times. We don't want to rush into applied science, but we don't want to be forever focusing ever more on pure inquiry while our chances to apply our knowledge go unharnessed to our detriment. As an example, one thing that contributes to aging is a buildup of lipofuscin in our lysosomes. One of the rare lysosomal storage diseases, Gaucher's disease, has been addressed through applied science, and now thousands of people are living normal lives despite having the disease. Yet some still continue to classify the contributing factors of aging as too premature for their accumulation of surrounding scientific knowledge.

As stated in the beginning, this seems to be because of a difference in fundamental philosophy, and not an absolute need to go through more scientific inquiry before we decide that launching this cause is right. Indefinite life extension is not too cutting-edge when it is part of your fundamental philosophy, that conquering the blight of involuntary death is desirable. Here, the same principle is at work as the one that motivated those scientists who understood the tragedy and misery that comes with Gaucher's disease. These scientists worked to start making a difference, and they succeeded. Likewise, to combat involuntary death, it is possible to make a difference and to make it now.

A major difference between the two efforts, a reason why we can argue that it can be injected into schools at all levels, is that we all experience aging. Exploring indefinite life extension starts with accepting the imperative fundamental importance of working to defeat it.

[kmoody]

Robomoon, a big difference is that elixirs and alchemy and such things are replaced by science. We couldnt teach that elixirs and alchemy might be able to do the job, but we can teach that science could do the job because we already know that we can do recombinant dna splicing, and design enzymes, work in cells, alter their machinery, cure some diseases etc...

This is a very delicate game and those who would present our message, whatever that may be, would need to tread lightly. Too much of longevity science is hypothetical at this point to constitute a viable educational component at that level. Sure, some neat methods would be interesting to talk about, but there would need to be some serious consensus about what the message actually is, and a clear line between fact and fiction. From my current understanding of how the world works, an "indefinite lifespan" is so far beyond reasonable possibility that I cannot identify with it. However, ending biological aging may be an easier task to accomplish, and sure there are some thoughts about how that may be accomplished. I just don't know that students in high school are capable of thinking on this level. They're in high school, so aging does not affect them (they're indestructible, remember?). They also lack the technical expertise to appreciate major points about how the field is progressing. I recall a presentation I went to in my AP biology course. The guy was a phenomenal speaker, and hit us hard with "shock and awe" about the most cutting edge technologies at the time, including Langer and Vacanti's ear replacement, grown on the back of an immunocompromised mouse. The key point is that the presentation topics were things that had ALREADY happened, or had a general consensus in the scientific community as being close to occurring. That largely limits our discussion to regenerative medicine, which others are already popularizing. What message would you send which provides novel value for education, would engage the students, and is scientifically ground to such an extent that it could be reasonably backed by existing literature?

[John Schloendorn]

"Hey kids, check out how incredibly hopeless this is", albeit realistic, is unfortunately not exactly the most engaging message. Hype is one way to hope (there are others). Hope is essential. We can't be here working on life extension without hope.

Sometimes you can have somebody naive come into a field, with no appreciation for where the real problem are, and in failing on one problem provide some very interesting new perspectives for other problems in the field (name your examples). If they're really open minded, they can even change tracks and learn how to make useful contributions themselves later. And those kinds of entrepreneurs wouldn't necessarily always have the courage to try something as outrageously bold, if they were able to see how foolish their quest is from the start.

You can teach as facts what's "backed by existing literature". Should a teacher want to do more than teach facts? Maybe teach inspiration? It's a difficult balance.

[treonsverdery]

well the fancy name for this is curriculum

there is a curriculum repository called curriki http://www.curriki.org/ Anyone can put a curriculum item there that teachers can use.

a curriculum would be an amusing thought provoking science lab like

Does Revlons antiagingserum luxcouture make bugs live longer?
we compare bugs fed water, revlonluxcoutour, as well as deprenyl

The bugs live longer on deprenyl

antiaging is possible

The majority of biological scientists are women Jr high n above might think applying makeup to bugs to verify advertising interesting

A very simple zebrafish lab might show that fish with any of various chemicals added to their food caused them to live longer

[bio123]

Just tell them their parents are disgusted by the idea and they'll lap it up...