X-Message-Number: 11402
From: "Scott Badger" <>
Subject: The Most Deserving
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 23:31:50 -0600

Jeff Davis and I have conversed on this topic, and Jeff feels that our
discussion should be posted to Cryonet, so here it is (with minor editing):

Jeff wrote:

>Scott wrote,
>
>>I know that people clearly indicated on the survey that their decision
would
>>not be influenced by the fact that a celebrity had signed up. But you know
>>what? I don't believe em.
>
>Little story. Can't vouch for it historical accuracy.
>
>Some years ago i read that Ford did a marketing study where they asked
people what kind a car they would like. From the results of that study they
built the Edsel. Big flop.
>
>Then they did a study where they asked them what kind a car they thought
the average guy wanted. From that study they built the mustang. Huge winner.
>
>Moral of the story: If you ask people about themselves, they'll tell you
what they think will make you think well of them. If you ask them about some
imaginary average person, they will unwittingly tell you the truth about
themselves.
>
>Watch what happens with the two data sets when you ask them: "Would the
average person be influenced if their celebrity icon signed up for
cryonics?" Wanna make a little bet about the results?
>
>
>>Celebrity spokespeople are a staple in the
>>marketing biz, and products used by celebs often take off even when
they're
>>not being commercially endorsed. And most are not going to admit on a
>>survey (or to themselves) that they mimic the actions of celebrities. But
>>they do.
>>
>>So the question occurred to me, "Has a real effort been made to promote
>>cryonics to celebrities? Could there be a better market niche than vain
>>people with lots of money?" OK, they're not all vain. Actually, I would
>>approach this very honestly by selecting the most talented (and
well-known)
>>artists, actors, musicians, architects, scientists, etc I could think of.
I
>>would somehow try to convey to them how very important I feel their
>>contributions to society are and how everything possible should be done to
>>preserve gifts like theirs. I would write them, not as the representative
>>of a cryonics firm, but as a fan and a cryonicist.

Let me add here that I m referring to preserving the very talented.  Many of
those who enjoy celebrity status are not particularly among those that I
would target in this hypothetical campaign.   And many of the gifted
(deserving of preserving) are anything but celebrities.

> I'm startin' to get a little excited about this Scott, and I'll tell you
why. Pick a celebrity or two at the top of YOUR list. I pick Bob Dylan. His
poetry, his music, HIS MESSAGE move me to the core. Out of pure personal
selfishness I want him to stay around, so i can enjoy more of what he puts
out.
> Suppose I go to Bob and I say, "Look, your stuff is so important to me,...
millions of others too, of course, but they're not here talking to you--so
important to me that I don't want to lose you. I know that sounds silly but,
you see, I going into the future and I'd,...well,... I like to have the
pleasure of hearing your next thousand albums,...hear your take on the
future,...the next thousand years."
> Now assuming I can get past the problem of him thinking I'm a wacko,
what's he gonna think then? Remember, even though we relate to these people
with a kind of idolotry, they are human beings just like us. Bob's gonna see
a human being--a fan sure--but a human being who likes his stuff--there's
flattery there--but who, unlike most fans doesn't want to suck his life
energy from him,... doesn't want something from him (at least not in the
usual way), but rather wants to do something for him. Something highly
unusual, and possibly of great value. By the way, Bob is a family man, got a
passle of kids, so I hear. So instead of the usual "parasitic" fan, here is
an intelligent, sincere, concerned individual with something of possibly
immense value to him AND HIS FAMILY.
> With celebrities there's one lucky thing: money's not an issue.
> Now, take the above scenario, and substitute YOUR celebrity, and put
yourself in as the person passionately wanting to keep their gift in the
universe, and presenting that to them in the way you think most persuasive.
Does this seem excitng to you,... like something that has possibilities?
>
>Just a thought,... Doesn't it make sense to give away celebrity suspension
for free? Or would that come across as trying too hard?

>>If we want to get some consensus on cryonet re: approaching celebrities ,
I
>>think we need to avoid approaching the issue from a marketing standpoint.
>
> I agree.
>
> The concept of "marketing" conveys an overt crassness--polyester, baby.
Puts people off. I think we can delete that after privately absorbing the
positive lesson--the effectiveness of a mind set which is unsentimental,
focused, rational, and goal-oriented.
> I consider myself to be an altruistic, high-minded, and compassionate
person, fervently dedicated to bettering the human condition. Really I do.
But I don't hesitate for a minute to admit--in fact, it really tickles
me--that my altruism is utterly selfish. I want to save the ones I love, i
want to save me, and i want to indulge my sense of personal ethicalness--I
want to be a helluva guy so I can enjoy the egotism of thinking of myself
that way--by helping others to realize that they can save themselves as
well, if they so choose.
> {But we'll just keep that to ourselves, and let others think I'm utterly
selfLESS. ;-)}
>
>>Our thrust should be. . ."we are obliged to make an effort to persuade
>>everyone to choose life and hence cryonics, but we are particularly
obliged
>>to make an effort to persuade those with especially developed skills or
>>gifts."
>
> Agreed, absolutely. The above is a first draft, right?, subject to a bit
of tweakage, right?

Right.

>>Stanley Kubrick just died, and I grieved. Yes, because he died but even
>>more so because his irreversible loss might have been prevented if he'd
been
>>properly educated about cryonics. But I doubt that the idea of contacting
>>him was even considered.  It probably seems crass to try to sell someone
>>something when they're approaching death. Cryonists would probably worry
>>about coming across as vultures. But if we really believe that cryonics
has
>>a damn good chance of working then how do we morally reconcile our *not*
>>reminding those near death that they have an option?
>
> We don't, we can't.
>
> To us, as cryonicists, this death thing is unique and uniquely bitter.
Everyone else gets the comfort of resignation, "He/she was a great spirit,
but there's nothing to be done, death is our common destiny, etc." For
us,...well,...we have to live with the realization that they're dead and
lost because we blew it. Frank Sinatra's gone, possibly because I screwed
up. Feynman, Bucky Fuller, Jessica Tandy, Lawrence Olivier, Juliet
Prowse,...the list goes on,...all possibly because I didn't have the courage
to make some noise.
>
>---------------------------
>
(1) >Re: the freebie,
>
>>Since we would be approaching them as fans and not representatives of
>>cryonics firms, it wouldn't make sense to try to make them a deal like
that.
>
> Get prior approval of the cryonics orgs.
>
>>Besides, why give it away when they can afford it so easily.
>
> If their value to cryonics is greater than their suspension fee, then a
freebie is economically rational.
>
> Which brings me to a new element of the celeb thing.
> Celebrities have the emotional power to break through to others. But it
just struck me that celebrities are people, too, which means they're fans,
too. If a celeb went to someone he/she idolized, how very much more
effective would THAT appeal be?!!! But wait! Suppose you go to Celeb #1
"ostensibly" seeking their help in signing up Celeb #2 (of whom Celeb #1 is
a fan). Doesn't this have a powerful tendency to persuade #1 to sign up.(You
go to Lauren Bacall and ask her help in getting Anthony Quinn signed up.
Doesn't Lauren end up enrolled as well?) Which brings in more celebs, and
then the whole thing just snowballs.
>
>>>I like the way you write and I'll bet that you could put together a darn
>>good standard letter that could be snail/e-mailed to any number of
>>celebrities. Why don't you compose something that we (and maybe others)
can
>>chew on? It would have to lay out the basic logic behind our thinking
while
>>retaining the "I'm a big fan" flavor.
>
> Ouch, flattery. You got me right in the ego. Ok. I'll start up on it.
>
> Best, Jeff Davis

I assume at this point that Jeff is working on a first-draft generic letter.
It would be nice to see a large number of people (cryonicists, transhumans,
extropians, whoever) willing to attach their signatures to the final draft.
I would think the letter would have more impact if that were the case.  If I
haven t made it clear yet, I further think this should be undertaken by
someone who does not represent a cryonics firm.  Those whose signatures are
included on the letter should have no monetary incentive for doing so.  Yes,
we will benefit indirectly by those who sign up, but the focus should be on
the preservation of the very talented and the associated benefits those
talents bring to society in general.

I also realize that one obvious counter-argument (among the informed) might
be that even the "very talented", when reanimated in the future, may well
find that their aquired talents are no longer valuable since everyone's
intelligence may be greatly enhanced by that time.  Not to worry.  No reason
why such enhancements won't be available to the cryonicized upon their
re-awakening.  Besides, it's entirely possible that whatever makes these
individuals extraordinary now has the potential to make them extraordinary
when they are enhanced.

Your thoughts?

Best regards and long life to all,

Scott Badger

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11402