X-Message-Number: 26398
References: <>
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Church promises unlimited life span  (was: Re: Ethics of Immortality)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 18:03:35 +0200

On Jun 25, 2005, at 1:16 PM, John de Rivaz wrote:

> One of the points of conflict between religion and cryonics

A general problem in this discussion is an attempt to compare things of 
different types. A religion in a broad sense constructs a worldview and 
an associated way of life. Cryonics is a procedure or ritual that could 
be a component of a worldview and an associated way of life. Thus, 
cryonics is equivalent to the "last rites" in the Catholic Church, for 
example.

Typically, religions have little to say about the cryonics procedure, 
which is based upon preserving the cell, since religions don't have the 
concept of the cell in their worldview. In this sense, there is no 
conflict between "religion" and cryonics.

On the other hand, a church does offer a solution to the existential 
problems of life, including birth, marriage, and death. (Specific 
rituals are typically associated with these events and offer life-cycle 
guidance. Individuals encounter these events only once, or a very 
limited number of times, and thus are dependent upon external knowledge 
to support any decisions they must make.) In this sense, cryonics is in 
conflict with "religion", since the procedure is based upon a worldview 
directly in conflict with that offered by "religion". That is, 
existential issues are not dealt with thru symbolic means, for example, 
prayer, but thru physical procedures, such as contraception, clonal 
medicine, and cryonic suspension. Here we can see that cryonics, by 
itself, in no way offers a life-cycle existential solution, just a 
single procedure.


> could be that
> cryonicists are seen as a group of people each of whom has the sole
> objective of saving their own life. If on the other hand the group 
> could
> present itself as one which seeks to save live generally, then maybe 
> this
> would help.

What is needed is an institutional framework that transforms individual 
objectives into group objectives. In economic life, a market is 
supposed to play this function: Individual greed is transformed into 
optimal resource utilization.


>
> This is of course extremely difficult, as the whole world likes the 
> ideal
> concept of medical care being available at the point of need and work 
> out
> the cost later.

> The early days of cryonics have shown the harsh reality of
> economics -- try to offer "humane" care for everyone and count the cost
> later, and the group quickly collapses.
>

The point is that a church is not primarily an economic institution. It 
can offer all services in exchange for 1/10 of your income, for 
example. Typically, these monetary contributions are tax advantaged, 
giving members greater benefits than they could get individually thru 
economic exchanges.

Since religions are not regulated, there is a tendency to inflate the 
value of the services.



>
> The one thing that does help is the fact that some cryonics 
> organisations
> are continually investigating preservation methods that are lower in 
> cost
> and easier to provide for those with large families dependant on few
> earners, or single people with little earning capacity. There is the 
> problem
> that it is regarded by some as unethical to offer something that is 
> even
> less likely to work than a state of the art cryopreservation, but to
> paraphrase the words of Thomas Donaldson, "Should we force that person 
> to
> face annihilation because some cheap process is very unlikely to work."


Here is my thought experiment:

We set up a Church that promises an unlimited life span of good 
fellowship, travel among the stars, great parties every Sunday, a nice 
magazine to show friends, etc. At birth, you get placental stem cells 
suspended as the first ritual act. At maturity, you get sex cells 
suspended, in order to ensure as many healthy children as you want, 
regardless of your age or medical condition/treatments. At deanimation, 
you are preserved by cryonic suspension, if economically possible, or 
plastization, freeze drying, etc. if funding isn't available. I doubt 
if most individuals would be able to distinguish among these, given the 
continual advance of revival technology (we could say you get back to 
partying sooner with cryonic suspension :-). All this for only a tenth 
of your income in tax deductible contributions (in some jurisdictions 
this could be economically neutral - meaning the individual would not 
pay anything in the final analysis).

Would this work economically?
Assume an average income of $10,000 and a "natural" life span of 120 
years. You start paying at age 20, so your "lifetime" contribution is 
$100,000. Assume half goes to all services except suspension then we 
can afford a CI suspension with transport, etc. fully covered.

Next question is where to get the startup expenses.
It seems to me everyone in the cryonics movement would benefit, since 
there is eventually going to be a political/religious showdown between 
traditionalists and immortalists. Loosing the fight could mean a loss 
of all patients and destruction of existing organizations. The only way 
to ensure survival in the long run is a vastly expanded population of 
supporters - not to mention having a religious freedom argument handy.

For a start, the cryonics organizations could donate space for stem 
cells, etc. and a full body suspension or two. This would get them good 
press countering the selfish image most people currently entertain. It 
would also make it possible for the new Church to offer top quality 
suspension services immediately. Individuals' contributions or a single 
wealthy donor could cover the legal and other startup expenses. Once a 
legal structure was in place, contributions could be taxed advantaged 
to make life easy for the contributors. Or maybe we should call them 
Saints ;-)


Can you see any fatal flaws in this plan?



dss




David S. Stodolsky    SpamTo: 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26398