X-Message-Number: 22940
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:28:34 -0500
From: Paul Antonik Wakfer <>
Subject: Re: Cryonet # 22928 - Reiterate "old friends"
References: <>

> Message #22928
> From: 
> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:58:56 EST
> Subject: Reiterate "old friends"
> 
> In a message dated 11/25/2003 5:01:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
>  writes:
> This goes out to Eugene Leitl and Paul Wakefer and Phil Rhoades. Welcome 
> back to cryonet guys.
> 
> Now I'm wondering where other old friends are. If these are lurking we 
> miss you.

Speaking for myself and Kitty, neither of us consider anyone on this 
list to be "friends". We think that it is important for people to be 
more judgmental of character and worldview when selecting friends and to 
only call people "friends" when they share one's *fundamental* approach 
to reality.

We do not understand how anyone can think that a mere desire to be 
cryopreserved (which is little different from the simple instinct for 
human survival) is evidence of such a fundamental similarity. When 
cryonicists begin to realize that other cryonicists come with almost all 
the same differences which they find among people in society in general 
and do *not* have much philosophy in common, they will realize that they 
  should *not* treat each other as "friends", but instead as merely 
other individuals with a narrow common goal. This does not, of course, 
mean that cryonicists should not act with courtesy and common decency of 
consideration toward one another. Such should be the default action even 
between strangers in any society which hopes to attain the long range 
interests of all through the medium of free exchange of values to mutual 
self-interest.

I am stating this so strongly because I see it happening among many 
people on this list. I am one who in the past made this mistake twice 
(at least). Both when I became a Libertarian (active party member) in 
the mid 70s and when I became a cryonicist (end 80s), each time I 
stupidly thought "here I will find more people who think, approach life, 
and value aspects of reality like I do." Each time I was drawn in and 
gave up far too much of my personal resources before I realized that 
this was not so at all. Each time, I was thoroughly disgusted and 
depressed by the results and the failure. Finally, I have matured to the 
stage where that will not happen again.

This having been said and understood, however, I still think there are 
many things that cryonicists can do jointly to promote their common 
goals even as narrow as those are and as different from one another as 
cryonicists are personally.


> (Rudi Hoffman writing)
> 
> I also wonder as does James whether some of his mentioned (and unmentioned) 
> former cryonics "activists" are lurking or simply have stop reading Cryonet. 
> 
> (The cynics among us might say "Well, perhaps they got a life!:))

Nevertheless, it is important for everyone to also have a life fully 
apart from cryonics, especially since as I described above, there is no 
basis in cryonics itself for any complete approach to life.


> Especially Fred and Linda Chamberlain, people who are certainly among the 

> pioneers of cryonics.  I like them both, and truly wish them well.  It would 
be 
> nice to have an update regarding Linda's cancer.  I hope she has recovered.  
> 
> Does it seem strange to anyone else that the Chamberlains just "dropped out 
> of sight" on the cryonics radar?

Not really. It is highly characteristic of them. They did exactly this 
before. It seems that if they cannot be running things they have little 
interest. I am *not* criticizing this. In fact, it is a reasonable 
characteristic to have. *I* certainly would not even want to have a 
board of Directors telling me what to do and what not to do. That is 
precisely why I was self-employed for most of my formal working life, 
and it is why my "career" in cryonics ultimately failed - my plans were 
dependent on too many other people. However unfortunately, the nature of 
cryonics (and the optimal operation of society in general) *is* 
necessarily dependent on the mutual cooperation of many people toward 
common goals. What many of us need therefore, are clear delimitations of 
the extent of that necessary cooperation rather than a general kind of 
getting-in-bed-together "friendship".

> 
> I know there was a certain amount of controversy and issues near the end of 

> their administration regarding funding glitches with "Cells for Life," and it
> is certainly not my intention to bring up any old "Cryonics wars."  
> 
> But in our still abysmally miniscule cryonics "family" if people who have 

> been so active and dedicated can become so "burnt out" and/or ostracized that 
no 
> one even seems to mention them, we need to consider what causes this.

I also don't wish to resurrect old differences. I will only make the 
general statements:
1) When the "differences" between the protagonists involve unethical 
practices in their view, then they can no longer work together, even in 
a normally polite and courteous manner.
2) The only way to prevent actions from becoming contentionally 
unethical rather than factually unethical is to always work within clear 
and fully stated contracts - Contracts which are written so that each 
party knows exactly what are his entitlements and responsibilities, 
which contain termination clauses (clauses delineating the method by 
which each party can terminate his place in the contract) and methods of 
amendment during the duration of the contract relationship, and which 
include disinterested arbitrators (whose initial job is to see that each 
party to the contract understands his/her place in the contract in the 
same way as do the other parties). Only when people begin to use such 
contracts to describe their complex arrangements with others will such 
"controversies" and the politics which surround them be greatly reduced, 
if not ended.

> 
> This is still an INCREDIBLY tough business for "volunteers" and "near 
> volunteers" in all sorts of ways.

It does not have to be so if approached as I have described above. It 
only becomes so when individuals donate themselves in an almost open 
ended, cart-blanche manner. This must stop both for the good of the 
individuals involved and for the good of cryonics.

> 
> Recognizing this, it is helpful for us all to have as much compassion, 

> empathy, and appreciation for the visionary leadership we have as we can 
muster.

Not quite. It helps much more if you are simply, honestly and 
objectively frank, direct and fully complete about what you say. The 
whole truth and nothing but the truth of one's thoughts and even one's 
feelings is what is needed in all one's human interfaces. In fact, such 
an approach is, by default, the most sincere exhibition of the 
compassion, empathy, and appreciation" which you request above.

> 

> And perhaps mechanisms to "get away" from the fray on a temporary basis (when
> you just can't stand another minute with opinionated, anti-authoritarian, 

> misguided fellow "volunteers" who have got it desperately wrong) and still 
come 
> back refreshed after a period of time.

The difference between "being opinionated" and "having a different 
opinion" (with good reasons given) should be appreciated. People
who cannot do that should not be "leaders".

Similarly, being anti-authoritarian is *never* wrong. No one should 
*ever* do what another wants because of "authority" but only because 
what they want is correct - ie. it works in reality. The only time this 
does not apply is in the "heat of battle" (such as a cryopreservation 
team) where you have signed a contract ahead of time to follow the 
orders of a leader (but even there the exact nature of the orders which 
will be unquestionably followed must be strictly described and delimited 
ahead of time by the contract). However, after the "battle" is over, the 
contract should be such that you can fully dissent and even state that 
you will never follow such orders again. Given such criteria for when 
independent action can and cannot be taken, rest periods for psychic 
recovery should be able to be part of the normal activities.


> We will prevail.  The preservation of individual lives is a megatrend, and a 
> turning point in the evolution of life on earth.  We are engaged at the 
> forefront of this epic work.  Individual lives matter.

First, you need to get rid of the use of this global "we". All that you 
can do is speak for yourself. Secondly, cryonicists will prevail much 
more quickly if they stop thinking that they are some kind of close 
family and face the reality that they come with all kinds of different 
and incompatible philosophical notions. *All* that they have in common 
is the desire to be cryopreserved instead of buried or burned, for 
whatever reason. In fact, once cryonicists realize this, then they will 
be much more open to seek other people who have an interest in 
cryopreservation even though that interest may not be related to human 
life-extension. I have described many of these groups on my website 
(which came out of the Prometheus Project) at http://morelife.org/lpcs/ 
which is still largely incomplete because it received such a poor 
response from cryonicists when I first started it.

> 
> Kind Regards to all, especially the visionaries who are actually doing the 
> real day to day slog of making cryonics a reality in our lifetime,

People working directly within cryonics need far more than mere thanks 
and appreciation. Most of all they need a better framework within which 
to enable their total happiness needs to be fulfilled.

--Paul Wakfer

MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org
Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality
The 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=22940