X-Message-Number: 26424
From: "David Pizer" <>
Subject: More Straw Men
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:04:02 -0700


I believe Joe got emotional and accidently thought that I had said things that I
did not say.  His argument beats up a tired old straw man.  But nothing he has 
said so far counters my original argument that has to do with guarantees that 
some religions make.


For those who might be interested in what I have called the greatest moral 
problem to yet face manking, here are my replies to my friend Joe Waynick.



JOE SAID:  Oh boy, here we go. I propose another argument. It goes like this:  
1.      Some cryonicists promise people immortality based on beliefs of

faith in science being able to resuscitate them and restore them to good  health
in the future.


DAVID:  NO Cryonicists that I know of has ever "promised" immortality.  They all
have carefully used words like:  "might work" "maybe"  "We hope" etc.   Joe, I 
think you accidently let your emotions cloud your ability to read carefully what
I did and did not say.  I clearly only said that cryonics *may* work.  But then
you said that, too.


In my specific moral argument I never said there was a "promise of immortality" 
in cryonics.   In fact, it this promising (by religions only) that is at the 
main part of the problem.  

1.  Cryonicists do not promise anything.  
2.  Some religions promise eternal life.  
3.  That's the beef.  


Further, no cryonicists that I have ever met rejected God because of their 
cryonics beliefs.  They may have signed up for cryonics because they already did
not believe in God nor Heaven and still they want  a possible chance at longer 
life and felt that cryonics was their only chance.  If you don't see this now 
that I have clearified it, then I defy you to name one person who has rejected a
belief in God and Heaven only because the technology of cryonics exists. 



JOE AGAIN MISQUOTES WHEN HE SAYS:    For a group of people who scream at the 
first sign of religious intolerance, we seem to be a highly intolerant group 
ourselves. 


DAVID:  I am not screaming at religions intolerance.  You are building more 
straw men.  I ONLY want those religions who guarantee eternal life in Heaven to 
stop guaranteeing it.   They can continue to say they hope for eternal Heavenly 
life and maybe followers can have it under certain conditions.  I want them to 
say "maybe" just as we cryonicsits say "maybe" when we talk about what cryonics 
might provide.


JOE SAID:  This is  the worst kind of hypocrisy I can think of. If someone wants
to choose religion, why is it our responsibility to file lawsuits to stop them
because we think cryonics is a better way?   


DAVID:  I never advocated that cryonics was "better."  If God and Heaven exist 
and Heaven is all that it is cracked up to be, it surely would be a better deal 
than cryonics.  But again you are missing the point.  I have no beef with God 
and Heaven.  I just don't know for sure that they exist just as I don't know for
sure that cryonics will or will not work.   I don't want anyone *guaranteeing* 
the final results of either of them.    At present cryoncists don't guarantee 
anything, and some religions do guarantee eternal life in Heaven.  This might 
keep people from trying for cryonics.  This might lead to the greatest harm that
could befall them.  Notice the use of words like "might."


I don't want to file lawsuits to "stop them" period.  I don't want to put them 
out of business.  I just want them to be honest and not say they can speak for 
God and guarantee eternal life in Heaven.  They can still say they hope there is
eternal life in Heaven.  They can still say they think that their prescribed 
way of behavior might work in getting one to Heaven, but they shouldn't  
*guarantee* it.  


I am not trying to harm religions.  In fact, one could argue that I am trying to
make it better.  Many of the beneficial changes in religions today have come 
from people like myself that at the time they advocated the changes they were 
villified by the religions, and much later after the religions had made the 
changes they were then considered great crusaders, or at least their ideas that 
later became part of the religion's dogma were at that time considered to be 
good.  I suspect that some day religions will take up what I am suggesting at 
this early time - stop the guarantees.


Joe, it would please me if you would quit saying that I want to attack 
religions.  I just want to make them be honest in what they guarantee.  I don't 
want any human to guarantee things in God's name!  They can still say that they 
hope that God will do certain things, they just can not speak *for certain* for 
God.



JOE SAID:  Can you imagine what would happen to us if every church in the 
country decided to file a lawsuit against Alcor because they believed (falsely) 
we are encouraging people to reject God? Are you really so naive as to think we 
could win such a fight? Do you want to be remembered as the guy who destroyed 
cryonics?


DAVID:  I would like to be remembered as a man who had the courage to demand 
truth and honesty in how religions and cryonics present their hopes and wishes.
Although I believe they don't have to be, in some cases they do compete with 
each other.  We all would be able to make better choices if they both played by 
the same rules and they both refrained from giving guarantees.


And if my argument turns out to be true (if it turns out that cryonics ends up 
working and there is no God and Heaven) then I hope by not letting (unknowable 
and maybe false)  promises of one to usurp the possible benefits of the other,  
I helped some people.


My argument does not say that one should quit their religion.  I would never say
that.  I think we all should live as if there is a God and Heaven and as if 
there is not a God and Heaven.  In other words, live a moral life, AND sign up 
for cryonics.  Don't guarantee things in the name of either.  Just state that 
either of them (or both of them) *may* work.  I hope they both do.


JOE SAID:    The fact is, you can not possibly know that cryonics is going to 
work with any more surety than people of faith can know God exists.


DAVID:  This is correct and go back and read carefully what I have said and what
I did not say .  

1.   I NEVER said that God does not exist.  

2.   I NEVER said that cryonics *will* work.


Joe, I suspect that the reason your arguments in your posts are all off-point 
and attack things that were not in my original argument is because you got very 
emotional when you read what I wrote and your read into the lines I wrote things
that I never said.  You were so angry because some other people do the wrongful
things you mentioned that you thought you saw that in what I wrote.  Go back 
and reread what I carefully said and what I did not say.  I don't think we have 
any dissagreements in what we believe is right and wrong.  I only think that you
are just a little more afraid to try to do anything about it than I am.


IN  CONCLUSION, I am not trying to attack religions.  I hope some of the stuff 
that they preach is true.  But I think the religions will be better if they 
don't make absolute guarantees in God's name.  And, at least so far I believe 
that my argument still shines sound in that if religions are wrong in what they 
guarantee, and if cryonics works, the people that rejected an option in cryonics
because they felt they had a guarantee of eternal Heavenly life will have been 
done the word of all possible harms.  This is the argument you should be 
attacking if you want to pick a fight with me.  But I believe that if you reread
the argument carefully you will agree with it.


Lastly, you make reference to how many religious persons there are and how many 
cryonicists there are.  The amount of people on each side means nothing to me.  
What counts to me is which side holds the more truthful position, which side is 
making guarantees which they are not authorized to do.  Which side is acting 
more responsible.  Remember,  the religions I have a beef with are the ones who 
make *guarantees.*  No cryoncists that I know of have ever advocated any 
guarantees in cryonics.  In fact they carefully and purposely do NOT make them.
This is the focus of my beef!

David



 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26424