X-Message-Number: 22612 Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:40:23 -0700 Subject: Re: The White Lodge of Cryonics From: Peter Merel <> Thanks to all for various public and private replies on this. I've picked out the ones that cover the main talking points. -- David Stolsky wrote, > I don't think this is supported by data. While there have been few > studies, unrealistic estimates of cost seem to generate a major > objection people have toward cryonics. I don't think cost perception by itself is a sufficent explanation for our wild unpopularity. To illustrate, there are many orders of magnitude more people in the world signed up for expensive crypts than for cheap cryonics. Why does someone lay out thousands for a crypt - or even a plush casket? One member of my immediate family has done just this despite my urging to the contrary. Her reason is that she doesn't want to contemplate her body being treated badly. Even knowing, rationally, that she'll have no experience of same. This makes perfect sense when I think of the various gewgaws and photos she keeps carefully arranged under lock and key. Her body has still greater sentimental value to her than these. It's similarly important to her that her body enjoys close proximity to the bodies of her beloveds and friends. She sees the crypt as like her house or car - a way to maintain her role in the social structure. Even when - especially when - that structure is set in stone. Thinking about bodies sentimentally or socially is not rational. But most of life is not rational. Here on cryonet we regard ourselves as scientists and engineers, but who among us doesn't spending several hours every day on something that has nothing to recommend it but that we find it aesthetically, spiritually, or socially compelling? Our lives are not made out of rational elements - if they were, we'd be bees. After 2 generations of marketing, 2,999,999 people out of every 3,000,000 people on the planet find cryonics too vain, too threatening, too speculative, or too inaccessible for their needs. It should be obvious that this isn't about the price - it's about the product. People don't need our product, so they won't buy it at any price. Not even when it's free! Last year's New Scientist competition illustrated that. > Suspended animation is widely > accepted as a future technology associated with space flight and many > people believe that it is within the range of current technology. Hundreds of millions of people love Star Trek and Star Wars. But only 12 guys walked on the moon. Just because someone says they like the idea of something doesn't mean they want to do it. They like it as a fantasy, a place to dream about. The everyday fantasist will no more shell out for cryonics than for Lagrange point colonies. > The type of Zen which includes long fasts might be a better bet. The > most holy are men that have, thru starvation and consumption of > selected fluids, 'mummified' themselves. Suspect you're thinking of the old tao chiao immortality pill. Full of heavy metals. Feed pills to a gullible subject for a while until they perish. The toxins keep their body from decaying while you cart them around the landscape in a wheel-barrow explaining how they've attained a "jade body" and are happily disporting on the celestial plane. Stick a few colored ribbons on 'em to prove it. Commence jade-izing gullible nobles - assuming ownership of their various estates in return - until you're a full fledged noble yourself. > So, while the details of what is being suggested are probably > incorrect, the overall point is valid. Venturism, as currently > structured, doesn't function as system to guide persons toward cryonic > suspension as a logical and inevitable step, but only to protect those > already committed to it. If we place the noble venturists at the heart of the White Lodge we could think of it as an evangelical program for them. It would provide different paths of approach for different faiths, reinterpreting their holy texts to facilitate same. If they can't get from there to here any other way, why not build a bridge? Just as John Grigg says, the Masons have had a lot of success doing this. The friendly-society route would be considerably less dangerous and more accessible than starting up a church. Good enough for the Bavarian Illuminati, good enough for us. -- Charles Platt writes, > it looked to me as if "Man into Superman" was aimed > along the lines that Peter has in mind; and it didn't gather many (if > any) > hardcore adherents. I agree that transhumanism as a bald-faced faith won't hunt. What's proposed is to piggy back instead on some demonstrably long-lived social organizing principle. > Second, an adoption of the apostolic approach would be a tacit > admission > that we are engaged in a faith-based rather than a science-based > endeavor. > This could discourage more people than it might attract. It would > certainly discourage me. I'd be discouraged too. This is why I thought to make the process of elevation in the White Lodge one requiring the transformation of faith into rationalism. But this is naive of me - I've yet to meet any religious person who was interested in dumping faith per se. Even those who've switched from, say, catholicism to buddhism or atheism still seem to need the discipline of contemplation and the assertion of creed. The objects of faith change, but faith itself - the need to replace ambiguity with axiom - appears to be a psychological constant. So Charles is right and this idea won't hunt either. > Third, while apostles will devote a great deal of time and energy for > "the > cause" (whatever the cause may be) their dedication can be dangerous, > especially in a field where we are dealing with delicate situations. > For > instance, I would not want a hardcore apostle making any critical > decisions regarding last-minute cases or legal paperwork. This third criticism is very telling. Having recently caught a disturbing History Channel show on the Hitler Youth, I had occasion to think about what it would be like to actually deal, day to day, with mind-fucked thralls. Not something I think any of us would be willing to do, and very, very easy for it to run off the rails. The thought of the FBI spending a few weeks outside the White Lodge cryo-compound playing Bruce Springsteen at top volume in preparation for fire-bombing the place is not an appealing one. > But lack of public interest in research into human > cryopreservation is much harder for me to understand than lack of > public > interest in cryonics. I don't think the public is really interested in anything they can't buy right now. The question for me is rather why there seems no great commercial interest in it. So many people awaiting transplants and no one working to create pricey organ banks? It scarcely seems credible. -- John Grigg writes, > It's amazing cryonics got this far with such a dedicated but small > core group but I do not believe it is running out talented & dedicated > adherents who can take it the rest of the way. Yes, the leaders in a > cryonics organization can be worn down by the pressures but that is no > reason to start up "The Church of Alcor" or "The Church of the > Cryonics Institute" quite yet... Not proposing to. The reason I posted is it occurs to me that a corporation might not actually be a sufficient organizing principle to keep people reliably stored over multiple generations. So then the question is, what other kinds of organization do we have available to us? Churches, friendly societies, charities, banks, and nations - seems to be about it. I actually think "The Bank of Alcor" would be best. But don't suppose banks are very easy to start. Nations are still harder. A charity might do it, and we already have elements of that in Alcor - anatomical gifts anyway. I like the idea of tidy young men on bicycles going door to door collecting contributions to freeze the needy. "Dear sir or madam, needy people, many of them children, will die tonight if you don't dig deep. Right here in this city - the place where you live. But you can save them. You can help us help them. Help us fund the local cryonics chamber where these poor children can sleep safely through their long night. Where they can be cared for in preparation for that great day when they will rise up. Oh yes, sister, that day is coming - praise Drexler!" Okay, so I got a little carried away there at the end. > Even many rationalists in the form of secular humanists and militant > atheists reject cryonics! lol I HONESTLY BELIEVE THE GROUP TO APPEAL > TO ARE YOUNG PEOPLE IN COLLEGE WHO ARE STILL LOOKING FOR THEIR PLACE > IN LIFE. "Give me the child until he is seven, and I will give you the man" -- Jesuits > Immortality is OUR problem for now until mainstream scientists solve > it over the next 30-80 years. And so we have cryonics as our > theoretical safety net in the meantime. I realize some cryonicists > hope the baby boomer generation will see things our way as they get > older and have to start considering their own mortality but I have my > doubts. If they're not rational now, they're hardly likely to become rational in their dotage. The boomers, if one can generalize about 'em, seem a pretty apathetic and self-satisfied bunch of people. They're the first generation that grew up on the glass teat. Difficult to imagine they're not happier fantasizing about it than actually doing it. > Peter, do you realize the public and journalists can easily access > Cryonet? This is NOT what I want them to be reading about us. I could say the same about a lot of recent posts to cryonet. Actually I did say the same. :-) But seriously, what do you think they might say about us that they don't already say? > There IS a terrible moral problem in proposing we brainwash people > into joining a cryonics cult, even a benign one. As I said: >> I'm not proposing to do this per se. I'm proposing that we talk about >> it and turn it over in our minds. Look at the angles. I personally >> don't want to enslave >> anyone. I prefer to think we could do this by actually freeing >> enslaved >> minds. > I do think if something like this were ever done the Masons are the > group which should be closely looked at and copied. I agree strongly here. So ... what do the Masons do that your Venturists don't? > The pillory is just too good for you! : ) But your post was well deserved. Thank you. > These are good observations but in time due to the Ventureville > community we will see a dual function where we not only protect our > members by providing a home/community for them (and even a way of life > to an extent!) but also reach out and try to persuade people to join > us. I should mention that the property I've purchased in Australia might conceivably be adapted to a similar purpose one day. When I am more settled and have more time for it I want to consider this prospect carefully. Peter Merel. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22612