X-Message-Number: 30451
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: What makes people take action?
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:55:51 +0100
References: <>

Previously, I suggested that religious persons would be difficult to  
reach, even if they were willing to change their attitude toward  
cryonics. Here we have direct support for this conclusion. Even when  
we include only those who claim they are willing to change their  
attitude, there is a highly significant difference between atheists/ 
agnostics and others on the question, "I would feel more favorably  
toward the idea of cryonics if a human were revived." (p<.01). There  
are also trends in the responses to "Extending one's life span through  
Cryonics is unnatural, selfish, and immoral."  (p<.1) and "I'm very  
optimistic about humankind's future and want to be there to see and  
participate in the amazing advances that will be made." (p<.1). Only  
atheists show a trend in their responses to, "I believe that Cryonics  
is an exciting idea and intend on looking into it further." (p<.1) in  
this group of persons willing to change their attitudes. (It is more  
difficult to achieve significance here, since over half of the  
respondents have been deleted. Only those most open to attitude change  
are included.)

Thus, even the ultimate success of cryonics, revival of a human, would  
not make religious people more favorable toward cryonics. Religious  
people appear to reject cryonics on moral grounds and they are less  
optimistic about the future. This indicates a worldview resistant to  
change as a result of information avoidance. On the other hand,  
atheists/agnostics would be more likely to seek information about  
cryonics given news of revival of a human. Only atheists appear to be  
more likely to seek information about cryonics even without such news.

Earlier, we showed that those who indicated either neutral or  
disagreement to the statement, "I would feel more favorably toward the  
idea of cryonics under no circumstances."  were less religious than  
those who were in agreement. Here we have selected only those who were  
in disagreement, therefore, those with the greatest readiness to  
change. These are also the least religious persons. However, even  
within this subsample, the religious persons would not be motivated to  
seek information about cryonics by news of revival of a human.  
Therefore, the educational strategy commonly used to promote cryonics  
will only work with atheists and agnostics. In the total sample of  
517, there are 34 atheists and 85 agnostics. Thus, 23% are reachable  
by the current strategy and this requires presenting the information  
to the person, except in the case of atheists, who comprise less than  
7% of the population.

One could object that many religious persons do, in fact, sign up for  
biostasis. However, this would be expected, since only 23% of persons  
are areligious. Therefore, if religious persons were five times less  
likely to sign up, we would expect to see the two groups equally  
represented. Finally, we must keep in mind that the conclusions here  
describe the 'average' person and some persons may be unusual in a way  
that effects the sign up rate. Given the extremely small percentage of  
people who sign up from each group, such deviations would be expected  
to have a major influence, perhaps even dominating the results.

Also, there may be factors not included in the survey that have a  
major influence. In fact, the results suggest that this must be true.  
The results above show that religion is a major, if not dominating  
influence. Religious world views or any other type of worldview are  
known to be generated by groups. The categories for indicating  
religious views are most likely too broad to be useful for our  
purposes. For example, we know that within Christianity, there are  
contradictor views about the application of medical technology. Some  
sects refuse inoculation, while other accept them. So, the category  
Christianity could easily include persons with opposing views on  
cryonics. Therefore, one sect might be over represented in signups,  
thereby distorting the figure. This would be expected  given the  
extremely small percentage of people who sign up. Only by identifying  
which sect a person comes from can we get a clear picture. While this  
makes it difficult to make predictions, it also points us in the  
direction of what can be done to promote cryonics effectively, that  
is, a group (creation) strategy. It also suggests that a survey should  
ask questions such as whether the person has any family members  
already signed up, etc.

Finally, the endpoint in the survey is the question, "I believe that  
Cryonics is an exciting idea and intend on looking into it further."  
Even if people do look into cryonics after expressing this intension,  
it is only one of many steps toward actually signing up, so we  
shouldn't expect to see the results from this survey accurately  
predicting signups.

However, the importance of worldview and the worldview defense we do  
see suggests that terror management theory is an appropriate  
theoretical framework. The research done in this area might be  
leveraged to achieve results far beyond what could be achieved on the  
basis of even the best survey. One prediction from that theory is that  
the mention of death will cause a reflexive withdrawal of attention.  
This is counterproductive, if we wish to educate or influence someone.  
This theoretical point is well supported by the survey data. The most  
influential question was, 'I'm excited about the prospect of waking up  
in a body made young again through bio-technological advances." On the  
other hand, agreement with the item, "I don't think about Cryonics  
because I don't like thinking about death." shows a negative effect on  
the action item,  "I believe that Cryonics is an exciting idea and  
intend on looking into it further."


dss

David Stodolsky    Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30451