X-Message-Number: 26550
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 22:43:43 -0700
From: Mike Perry <>
Subject: Replies to David Pizer
References: <>

>I actually have two arguments.
>The first one is that there is a wrong being done. That is the one I think
>is valid and sound in the philosophical sense of these words.

Every unbeliever will agree with this; it's nothing new.

>The second argument I do not claim a deductive conclusion. The second
>argument is what most of us are debating and that is that the best way to
>fix the problem that the first argument exposes is to sue them.

No, the "problem" we want to "fix" (address as best we can, that is) is how 
to get more people signed up for cryonics and have more suspensions and 
less burials and cremations. "Fixing" the problem with religion is only one 
possible approach; another, different approach would be to find a way of 
encouraging religious people to sign up for cryonics *without* attacking 
their beliefs (or their belief about their beliefs).

>I once asked a preacher what about the innocent people, say, in South
>America 700 years ago who did not accept Jesus as their savior because they
>had never heard of him. He said his church teaches that those people had a
>"desire" to try to find the truth and they should have built boats and
>crossed the ocean to find people who could have explained it to them. But
>because they were evil, they resisted doing this. And so even though they
>lived in South America in the year 1300, they were going to burn in Hell
>forever for not accepting Jesus as their savior. The church guarantees
>this is the absolute truth and many people believe their guarantee because
>they believe that church or religion is speaking for God as they claim to
>do.

This kind of doctrine I must confess I find *extremely* offensive (and also 
ridiculous) and it is a good reason, in and of itself, to remain an 
unbeliever in any religion that would profess it or something similar. And 
there are other reasons to be an unbeliever in any supernatural being or 
process, as many of us would agree, but we also need to stay focused on the 
main issue of how to maximize cryonics involvement.

>  So they then conclude that they don't need cryonics.

I will raise the issue of whether the benefits of cryonics have been 
correctly presented. It is a way of staying in the world longer (assuming 
it works)--I don't think they would object to that. Maybe they would say 
that they don't think one should try to outstay one's natural ("God-given") 
lifespan, but you could then ask for evidence in terms of their own 
beliefs--and so on.

>SCOTT: Another big problem with your argument is that you assume that
>this alleged guarantee is THE reason people choose to be religious, but
>that's a fallacy. There are many other factors that contribute to
>religiosity which you are not taking into consideration.

I second this.

>DAVID: Example: If you already have a guarantee that your mother will
>have dinner on the table when you get home tonight for you and all your 
>family,
>then it is logical that you will not stop at Jack-in-the-Box on the way home
>and buy dinner for you and all your family.
>
>The same logic must be true for extended life.

No, Dave. It is *not* always true. Suppose your mother will have dinner, 
but you want to have a glass of orange juice first. You know there isn't 
any juice at home, so you stop by a grocery store and buy a carton. You 
will still get the meal in any case. But you get an added benefit that is 
actually independent of whether the meal is waiting or not.

That is the way cryonics can be too, and it's the same with ordinary 
medicine. A Christian cancer patient, you might think, would not opt for 
any treatment because if that worked it would only delay his entry into 
Heaven, yet I think you find such people will very often choose the medical 
treatment in hopes it will extend their earthly life. Cryonics could be 
seen in the same light, if so presented. I think all too often people don't 
think of it that way and *they* perhaps form the snap judgment that their 
religious beliefs render it superfluous. But clearly it isn't so.

Mike Perry

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26550