X-Message-Number: 22585 From: "Kitty Antonik Wakfer" <> Subject: Despair Expressed [RE: CryoNet #22541 Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 04:48:58 -0400 I am only now responding to this message from Charles, because it was only today, Friday 9/26, that I read it, having been virtually out of touch electronically since early Wednesday 9/17. > Message #22541 > Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:34:55 -0400 (EDT) > From: Charles Platt <> > Subject: Alcor membership > > Because this issue has recurred in several posts on CryoNet, > the following message seems necessary, even though the topic > is somewhat personal. > > My concerns about personal differences or misunderstandings > between myself and Alcor seem to have been resolved, thanks > to some goodwill on both sides. Also I have been urged to > remain an Alcor member because I've been told that my > decision to quit membership was interpreted as a vote of no > confidence. I did emphasize (more than once) that I was not > doubting Alcor's ability to provide service, but some people > seemed unwilling to believe it. How, Charles, can you expect others who know you (or of you fairly well through your writings here and in other places on the Internet, and in various print media) to understand that your reasons were not about Alcor itself in some manner, if you did not provide adequate detail of your reasons. You would in that case be asking for them to take something on "faith", which is not something that I think you expect people to do. You might reasonably request that they hold their judgment in abeyance until you were able to provide an explanation, and that would be reasonable and many would be willing to do so. But to expect that they should just not make any judgment - ever - on your actions which did not appear rational *is* irrational in itself. Therefore, I am glad to have you provide some substance to your reason - even if the content of it, as you write below - is not sound in my opinion. But I will get to that in a minute... > > My primary satisfaction in cryonics has always come from > being active--helping to provide service for people who want > it, promoting the general concept, and trying to make > improvements which will benefit my daughter's generation if > not my own. I'm highly motivated to pursue these goals > because they constitute the only defiant gesture that I can > make in the face of human mortality, which I abhor. This > defiance is a matter of principle rather than self-interest. There is *no* conflict between principle and self-interest, Charles.... if the principle is rational. And it can only be rational if it is in the widest view long-range self-interest of the person involved. I say the *person*, the individual - not the group, not the family, not the tribe, not the neighborhood, not the nation, not the world.... It is the individual that is the essential element of these larger collections; and without the individual, each of these larger collections is nothing. We humans each have individual brains and none of us can know any other human better than we each can know our individual selves. It is at the *self* level that each must act first and foremost. It is at the *self* level that each of us can be most effective...and when we *each* are fully integrated as humans - fully understanding and acting on principles that are in our individual widest view longest range individual self-interest, we will be far more successful in our families, neighborhoods, towns, and even the larger associations in which we may choose to be members. (I purposely leave out the artificial entities related to governments, since they are not necessary and have done, and continue to do, more harm than good in the past 200 years. But that is another subject for another place. <http://selfsip.org>) In the meantime, all that we can do as individuals is to make every effort to improve ourselves in every manner possible with the end reward that we will be happier for it - happier in the sense of maximum life-time happiness; not the fulfillment of momentary whims or urges. It is this concept that Paul has described so well in his essay, "Self-Responsibility and Social Order", <http://selfsip.org/fundamentals/selfresponsibility.html>, which is a supplementary piece to his "Natural Social Contract", to be found in the writings of the Self-Sovereign Individual Project <http://selfsip.org>. As an additional point, Paul and I attended the IABG 10th Conference at Cambridge this past weekend - a *most* stimulating experience that I will be writing about from a personal perspective at MoreLife in the next week or two. Alcor had at least 2 direct representatives there who made quite positive impressions on those with whom they came in contact. Jerry Lemler was one of these. His presentation to the Monday late morning audience was very informative on the scientific aspects and extremely moving and convincing (at least to many) on the personal level. He was obviously not in the best of health, even to those who had never seen even a photograph of him from last year (he then carried far more fat on this body than one should for good health). Before beginning his presentation, he calmly announced that he had cancer (I forget which variety it was that he said - I was too intrigued with how he would and was handling a very difficult task) and spent every other week in the hospital receiving therapy. He went on to say that he would be reading his presentation because of his very recent hospital discharge, that the presentation had been prepared by others and he had not had sufficient time to incorporate it adequately. He would, however, attempt to answer any questions that might follow. Jerry very capably presented the explanation of cryonics, accompanied by a set of excellent power point slides via computer file, and I think he did so with great presence. I also think that the audience was impressed - by the scientific substance of the presentation and by the quality and circumstances of the presenter. It was a job well done, something that Paul and I let Jerry know a short time afterwards, as the attendees walked to lunch in the large dining room set aside for the conference usage at Queens College. One more point, Charles, to help you see that there is considerable hope that some of us older cryonicists (those over 50) may not have to actually use cryonics in the relatively near future, and that is that enormous progress is being made in the many areas of anti-aging. I encourage you (and others) to read some of the abstracts of the numerous presentations at the IABG 10thCongress <http://www.gen.cam.ac.uk/iabg10/> to make yourself aware of the capabilities in the fight against death that are present now and even more that are close at hand. There is no reason to despair about the scientific tools that can be created by humans to eliminate or at least greatly prolong the actual coming of death. There is also an enormous amount each person alive today can do him/herself to improve/maintain a excellent state of health in order to be still alive and capable of making use of the newest "proven" advances 20 years from now. (Questions about this aspect should be raised at sci.life-extension and/or MoreLife Yahoo so that others can benefit from the discussion.) > > I am less interested in receiving cryonics service myself > because my response to aging and death is sadness rather than > fear, and I question whether cryonics will do much to > mitigate the overwhelming sadness when I'm on my death bed. > Even if resuscitation turns out to be possible, I will be > facing decades of oblivion in the interim. Now you are really getting to the crux of *your* problem - thoughts that you will be required to spend decades doing nothing...paralyzed completely with a brain active and aware ... and incapable of stopping the passage of time. Now I understand your lack of enthusiasm; the sense of the waste of it - all of it, if you must be locked in a dewar-prison, unable to break the seal. Your mind a prisoner of the deep, cold, dark dewar, filled with LN2, not even air. I understand this fear of lack of control. As a bipolar, I've experienced several times this lack of mental control and can understand your fear - yes, I think there is a real element of fear in your expressed sadness. And even if the sadness is the major component, that too is informative to me, because I too could be sad at the thought that I know of no way to totally eliminate the possibility that I will find myself in or on the brink of mania again. I am a person who knows that I walk a narrow plank sometimes between rational thoughts and actions - and what many have termed insanity. I could be sad that my whole life will be this way, and that I must constantly be watching myself for signs that the narrow walkway has become a balance beam or tightrope. But I have learned that this gives me a unique perspective on life and a set of tools that few others - except perhaps other manic depressives - can appreciate fully in their goal to be a better individual, striving for optimum lifetime happiness. After reading your concerns, I actually thought about what it would be like if my mind were conscious in some manner during the time I was in suspended animation. Could I ride a gentle way of motion as the fetus does in the uterus, in the possibility that it would be like an undulating surface upon which my mind could drift from subject to subject, image to image, story to story of those captured in my mind from a lifetime of books read, conversations had, movies watched, sensations/feelings experienced? Could I do such a thing and have no sense of the passage of time, have no fear of the dark, cold, deep - fears natural to conscious humans. But I have no reason to think that such a demand would be made of me. I've undergone general anesthesia numerous times and recovered with no recall of the time actually unconscious. Therefore why should I expect that I would be aware of the time passing in the dewar when all biochemical processes have been suspended? Am I fearful that I would know none of those in the world into which I was resuscitated? No, because I have confidence that at least Paul will either be there ahead of me or soon afterwards. We both take all the measures that are reasonable for anti-aging purposes for someone over 50, and we virtually never go anywhere without the other. I can only think of rare unlikely scenarios whereby one or the other of us was successfully resuscitated and the other not. Therefore at the worst, we will likely have each other in a world of initial strangers. But we are adaptable individuals and know that we can be successful anywhere. And even if the "unspeakable" should occur, both Paul and I know that we are capable of loving others with the same high values of rationality, independence, integrity, justice, virtue - and never need to forget the memory of the other. I would like to know, Charles, how long you have felt this way? When did this first begin? How far back does it go? Was this feeling present when you, along with others (including Paul) left Alcor to form CryoCare? Was this your sense of life when you took over the Cryocare Presidency from another party who had succeeded Brenda? Was this behind your actions and inactions when you guided the activities - the life and death - of CryoCare? How far back does it go, Charles? I would like you to seriously think about it and tell me - a private email is acceptable if you'd rather not discuss this in public. I realize that not all people are ready yet to be as public about themselves as Paul and I are. I will not push you nor demand that you respond in public; nor will I publicize what you write me in private - if that is your requirement for providing the answers to the questions above. I would like to help, not ridicule you, nor shame you. I understand the weight of emotional burdens and I am most willing to help you adjust the backpack that you - and yes, all of us - must carry in life as a requirement for being truly human, truly an adult human. > > Because of my personal outlook, quitting membership didn't > seem such a big deal to me, especially since I have gone > without coverage twice before. However, for obvious reasons I > never wanted my choice to damage Alcor. Some people did seem > worried about this, and my primary concerns about personal > issues have been addressed. Consequently today I told Alcor's > membership administrator that I will not execute the form > that she sent me to retrieve ownership of my life insurance. > > By default, my Alcor membership will remain in effect. > > --Charles Platt > > **Kitty Antonik Wakfer MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Rational freedom by self-sovereignty & social contracting Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22585