X-Message-Number: 30141
References: <>
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: DSS points
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:09:29 +0100

On 15 Dec 2007, at 02:06,  wrote:

>
> Then DSS wrote::
>
>> Research in this area tends to show that a person's level of
>> 'happiness' is very little changed by events, in the long run.  That
>> is, a good event may lead to a boost in happiness, but the  level
>> returns to that normal for the individual shortly  thereafter.
>> Therefore, strategies to achieve happiness are not  likely to make  
>> any
>> real changes in the individual's life.
>
> This is also abbreviated too  much and misses much. As a  simple  
> example,
> suppose you correct your previously reckless behavior and live   
> longer than you
> otherwise would have. Maybe an attempt to measure your  "happiness"  
> would show
> little change, but few would argue that the change in  behavior  
> didn't pay
> off. The sum total of future happiness depends not only on  the  
> level of
> happiness but also on its duration.

The question of duration is not considered in research on happiness.  
It is only concerned with the "happiness" level. It isn't clear  
whether you can sum "happiness" for each minute/hour/day and get an  
average that means anything.


>
> DSS also wrote:
>
>> In fact, some argue that is
>> better for people to be less  happy, then the good events yield a
>> tremendous boost in happiness  and the bad ones have little effect.
>
>
> This is like the fellow who kept banging his head against the   
> wall, and when
> asked why, he said "Because it feels so good when I stop." In any   
> case, this
> seems at odds with his previous statement that choices have little   
> long-run
> effect on happiness.

No, this includes the question of duration and also the impact of  
"unhappiness". Thus, it is argued that "happiness" can be appreciated  
more, if it can massively boost the current state. This isn't a  
scientific argument, it is more like a personal preference.

The major point is that attempts to maximize happiness levels are  
doomed, because happiness functions more as feedback to guide  
behavior, then as a useful outcome measure over the long run. There  
are other indicators that try to measure "well being" that are much  
more useful for comparing states of the individual. "Happiness" is  
considered, by most researchers, to be more of a personality trait.  
Change, thus, would have to be a result of fundamental  
transformations in the self and society.


>
> Also DSS  wrote:
>
>> A more fundamental analysis shows that the cultural constructions
>> that provide meaning and value to the individual and society are   
>> what
>> must be changed to yield improvements in the human condition.  My
>> podcast provides a proposal that is consistent with the  cryonics
>> movement's goals (includes a compact summary of terror  management
>> theory in the middle section):
>

>
>
> I tried to locate DSS' referenced podcast but wasn't able to.   
> Perhaps he
> could provide an easily accessed summary.

I don't know what problem you could have had, the URL leads to a home  
page and then you click on "Podcasts". The direct link (for the moment):

<http://web.mac.com/davidstodolsky/iWeb/NooPod/Podcast/Podcast.html>


>
> In any case, what it boils down to, as far as I can see, is  what I  
> have said
> repeatedly. (1) We are too few to attempt a direct effort to   
> influence the
> structure of society.

All social change starts with a few people who decide to take action.


> (2) The wind is at our backs anyway, since  the
> consistent gains of science and medicine make our thesis more and  
> more  plausible.

This fails to consider political risk.


> (3)
> We need to husband our limited resources and apply them where  they  
> will do
> the most good, viz., in gaining members and improving   
> cryopreservation
> procedures.

These seem to be more or less independent. Data from as far back as  
Bager (1998) suggests that improving cryopreservation procedures is  
likely to have little effect on gaining members:
"The two variables which appear to have some mild motivational  
potential was Q41 (the revival of a human being) and Q42 (if it were  
cheaper)."

In the first case, people will have waited too long to participate in  
the cryonics "experiment". The second can be achieved by  
restructuring social arrangements, so suspension is gratis to the  
user at the point of service. This has been proven to be a highly  
successful strategy for health improvement.


>

dss


David Stodolsky    Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30141