X-Message-Number: 23312 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:58:36 +0100 Subject: Re: extinct instinct From: David Stodolsky <> On Friday, January 23, 2004, at 10:02 PM, wrote: > Some still wonder why cryonics is a hard sell, but the answer has been > obvious for a long time. The so-called "survival instinct" just > doesn't exist any > more, for most people most of the time, in the circumstances of modern > life. The "survival instinct" is an evolutionary built-in that is always present. > > Almost anyone will exert himself to dodge a taxi or a tiger, but if the > danger is not clear and present, then, for most people most of the > time, it just > isn't a major concern. And in today's world, clear and present dangers > are rare. Correct, that is why most responses are to meanings assigned by a cultural system. The development of a cultural system is driven by a motive, some call 'generative death anxiety'. This results from the conflict between the survival instinct and one's knowledge that the future holds destruction for the body. Within certain cultural systems, individuals may choose self-destructive acts because they offer symbolic immortality. Thus, they are responding to a symbolic reality, not a physical reality. > Very few people die of murder, or even war or terrorism. Auto and > industrial > accidents kill scores of thousands in the US every year, but the > threat is > merely statistical and shrugged off. Health concerns are taken > somewhat seriously > by many, but it took decades to make a dent in smoking practices. Even > eating > habits are affected mostly by the fear of looking unattractive, not by > fear > of death. A cultural system can define what threats to draw into the present and what threats to ignore. > And for the sick and elderly, the prospect of death is not especially > fearsome, and may even be welcome. Studies have show that the prospect of death is dealt with in middle age. > > People mentioned in the Alexander interview were FOR life extension, > and did > NOT think cryonics necessarily a very long shot--but STILL rejected > it. The > motivation just isn't there for most people. The bio-research > life-extenders are > not motivated by fear of death or even love of life, but just by an > intellectual toy and career possibilities. These people remain products of their culture, even though they may see other possibilities. The social institutions supporting change may not be available. > > Conclusion? Forget about "marketing" or magic bullets. There will be a > psychological sea change at some point, but we can't predict it or > jump-start it, Unless we really understand the psychological dynamics. I am not aware of any resources being expended on this type of research, so the inability to predict should be no surprise. > and we should not waste time or energy or money on over-ambitious > public > relations projects. The analysis I present suggests a cultural framework compatible with new technology is the key to progress. > We can work > patiently among our own families and circles of friends. The main > thing is to > do your best to save yourself and those close to you. This can be seen as promoting the development of a sub-culture supportive of life-extending technologies. dss David S. Stodolsky SpamTo: Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23312