1 reply to this topic

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 4243
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 20:58:15 +0700 (TST)
From: Robert Horley <roberth@ksc.au.ac.th>
Subject: Desperately Seeking Respectibility

In fact, in =FEmy opinion=FE, cryonic suspension will not only
never be accepted by today=FEs establishment, it will also be=20
actively opposed by them if it ever looks like succeeding. =20
In its heart of hearts the establishment knows that the
success of cryonics would be deadly dangerous to the
stability of the present social order. Cryonics and related
longevity research is one part of a looming paradigm shift
that will shake the very foundations of society more than
anything that has come before. Its triumph will probably
mean the destruction of all those cultural systems and
beliefs that have been built up over thousands of years to
help mankind deny of the reality of death and extinction.=20

Into the garbage can of history with traditional religion
based around the idea of an afterlife; into the garbage can=20
of history with state supremacy over the individual as
people stop worshiping their nations as immortality
fetishes; into the garbage can of history with the military=20
as people cease to see the heroic glorification of death as=20
a route to immortality; into the garbage can of history with
ritual human sacrifice through capital punishment and war;
into the garbage can of history with indifference to the
suffering and death of others as people cease to see death
as inevitable;...

I could go on and on with examples here, but I won=FEt.=20
However, I think we need to realize that everything that has
been achieved so far by cryonics has occurred in spite of
the establishment, and that the real battle will begin on
the day that cryonics looks like becoming a viable option
for the average man.

Robert Horley

[thefirstimmortal]

X-Message-Number: 4255
From: Ettinger@aol.com
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 11:46:45 -0400
Subject: doublethink

Robert Horley's thoughts (#4243) on mainstream views of cryonics are
perceptive on one level, but not necessarily really on target.

He points out that immortalism/cryonics represents a potential
ideological/cultural/psychological disaster for many people, a wrenching and
shattering change of world view that might arouse the most vicious response
if we ever seem on the verge of success either scientifically or in public
relations. I pointed out the same thing in the very beginning--but the key
word is "potential."

If you threaten the institution or belief that someone holds central to his
psyche, you threaten him (or so he thinks) and his response can be dangerous.
But we are dealing here with psychology, and the pivots can be extremely
delicate. Sometimes a mere turn of phrase can make the difference. And we
must not forget that wonderful human capacity for double-think.

To be a bit more specific, what happened when earlier religions were replaced
by Christianity? How was it able to prevail despite the hold of tradition?
Part of the answer is that Christianity had something new and valuable to
offer. The other part is that is that the new religion incorporated or
subsumed many elements of the old. The first Christians were still Jewish in
most ways, just as the first Jews were still in most ways adherents of the
previous cults. Christmas is generally believed to be a retrofitting of the
previous winter solstice festival, etc. (For that matter, several of the
miracles relating to Jesus are closely similar to those attributed to Gautama
the Buddha several centuries earlier.)

Again, one might have said (and many did say) that the rise of modern science
a few centuries ago was a mortal threat to religion. But the logical and the
psychological are not the same; science did turn some from religion, but most
adapted, accepting the benefits of science while retaining their religions
with minor modifications.

We have precisely the same things working for us. First, the benefits we
offer are real and major, while the task of adapting one's religion or
ideology--without seeming to abandon it--is relatively easy.

It follows that part of our job (at least in some contexts or discussion
circles) is to make that adaptation easier by NOT stressing the threatening
aspects of cryonics. This also means that it CAN be a wise tactic to seem (in
most respects) very mainstream. After all, no salesman tries to offend the
customer or emphasizes the potential disadvantages of his product.

I haven't always followed this reasoning myself. There is a certain
satisfaction in needling the noodleheads. And my next book, if I ever finish
it--the world's first scientific philosophy of life--will stick it to a lot
of people where it really hurts. But even here I will try to make it clear
that I hate the sin but love the sinner.

Robert Ettinger