X-Message-Number: 3238 Date: 11 Oct 94 13:30:00 GMT From: Subject: SCI.CRYONICS motivation 10/11/94 In response to the "perrennial question" concerning general apathy towards cryonics, Robert Ettinger last thursday tried to open up the notion of science to include any avenue, any "universe of discourse," any effort that will reveal knowledge about existence and get us to our destination. In this spirit, he quoted Paul Bridgeman as saying that science is "..doing your utmost with your mind, no holds barred." I should like to take this a step further in suggesting what "utmost" might imply. The effort we call thought and which, when methodized, can become worthy of being called science involves various processing techniques or ways of modulating our energy. Einstein, for instance, is said to have visualized using bodily sensation. Intuition obviously has an important role to play and equally obvious, without the emotional component of motivation, we wouldn't put forth any effort at all. Much of what science conventionally includes is, at any given moment, quite inert, mechanical and fixed. This includes methods, laboratories, instruments and paradigms. The dynamic, cutting edge of science is the novel hypothesis. It is my contention that insightful hypotheses are not just products of "no holds barred" mentation which implies a lack of inhibition and prejudice concerning modalities. I believe that, more cogently, they are the product of creative vision. I insist on adding "vision" on to creativity because I find existing notions of creativity too limiting. Just as an aside, I find it interesting to note that the creativity profession that has been around a little longer than cryonics (and is much better established), like cryonics, and despite the spectacular thrust of its mission, has found little resonance in industry or society at large. Another similarity with cryonics is that it consists very much of "work in progress" and still lacks the findings necessary to convincingly realize its potentials. To my mind, the most common form of creative vision is the Eureka experience. While Arthur Koestler claims this is merely bissociation (the collision of two apparently unrelated frames of reference), he seems to have overlooked a dimension of the experience. He does note the release of tension and the exhiliration of discovering a new understanding (as with Archimedes and the problem of measuring the volume of an irregular crown) but he seems to have ignored that, from this burst of energy along with the validation of our effort and of our mind there is also a new, heightened awareness for future possibilities that momentarily lifts the mind to a more integrated and conscious level of functioning than before. Increased integration and increased energy are but two sides of one coin - the coin of consciousness. The person having an Eureka experience, in the light of his spark of inspiration, sees more than just a solution to a given problem. With his inner eye, he sees, directly, a new level of energy and efficacy maintaining his thought process. Archimedes, for instance, had good reason to be pleased at his discovery. He could perhaps look forward to being rewarded by the king, but more than this or even the feeling of having gained knowledge, his inner sense of being and of "being able" was increased at having released himself from one of matter's prisons. For a moment, he became acutely aware (in his feeling if not in his mind), that within himself lay the creative capacity to overcome any obstacle and reach any achievement. Archimedes, like anyone undergoing a powerful Eureka experience, had a small peek at a world unencumbered by the ignorance of matter and, by implication, a brief taste of immortality. I believe it was this sense of freedom from restriction, this vision of great possibilities within himself, more than anything else, that propelled him out into the street exploding with elation. I believe that this burst of energy and momentarily increased integration and efficacy of mind (taken in the largest sense) is the essence of the creative vision upon which science and our future depend. The question that interests me is how to extend these moments so that we can become stable at higher levels of (mind) integration and accelerate the creative acquisition of insight and knowledge. It is not unreasonable to suggest that extended Eureka could provide more penetrating and more encompassing scientific vision in a bid to stem the tide of the anti-science bias in certain ecological circles. One could argue that pollution is a function of fragmented research that lacks depth of vision required for the efficient integration of knowledge and that this, in turn, has its roots in a general deficiency in motivation. I, for one, would like to see more discussion on what motivates researchers. I suspect that conventional motivators such as material gain, status and power are not necessarily those that fuel the level of vision that we need if we are to beat the race with death. How much research is consistently motivated by curiosity, love of knowledge, search for truth, love of life? How closely do we examine our motivation and how skilled are we at introspection when it comes to weighing our own feelings and sincerity? I quote from Prof. Ettinger's last post: "It also follows that the most important priority for anyone is to define your priorities, from the top down. What do you want? What SHOULD you want (if you use the scientific approach)? Then, what is your best strategy for achieving it? Hardly anyone has ever done this in anything approaching a systematic way." He goes on to say: "For the moment, I assume that the main goal of any rational person is to maximize personal satisfaction over future time. This will almost always place self preservation or life extension as top priority." While I agree with the general thrust, I feel Prof. Ettinger's "self circuit" approach lacks certain fundamental elements. I'd like to offer these insights on another occasion, that is if there is some interest and if I don't get flamed into oblivion. I believe my analysis will reveal the essential aspects of the reigning paradigm and the truly fundamental reasons why ignorance, vulnerability and death are so readily accepted as inevitable. David S. Devor Project Mind Foundation http://www.webscope.com/project_mind.html | Scientists have yet to discover that science is the ultimate spiritual | | endeavor in which the whole body must become an instrument of creative | | vision serving holistic, abundance-generating, restriction-eliminating,| | spirit-liberating, world transformation. - T.Kun | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Join our MOCHIN mind/matter list discussing world transformation! | | Send: subscribe mochin yourfullname, to: | | or write me for details: | Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3238