X-Message-Number: 22647
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2003 19:17:08 +0200
Subject: Re: The White Lodge of Cryonics
From: David Stodolsky <>

On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 08:40  PM, Peter Merel 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.

What we think is one thing, what the data tells us is something else, 
most often.


>
> 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.

It is obvious that we have no solid knowledge on this subject, 
scientifically speaking.

However, there is no doubt that people will tend to accept arrangements 
that follow from their way of life. Until such time that suspension is 
integrated in to one, we should only expect the 'deviants' (in the best 
sense of that term), to look to cryonics.


>
>> 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.

We have gone from 'impossible' to 'not a good idea', next is 'I thought 
of it first.'


>
>> 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.

No. The ref is on CryoNet. I think the last stage involves sipping 
turpentine.


>
>> 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?

But to what? A new way of life must be institutionalized.


>
> 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.

Perhaps, but the taxation, etc. is most likely different. A way of life 
will include ceremonies for key life events - coming of age, marriage, 
etc.


dss


>
David S. Stodolsky    SpamTo: 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22647