X-Message-Number: 33082
Subject: Re: Chastising Charles
From: David Stodolsky <>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 22:40:28 +0100
References: <>

On 27 Nov 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:
> 
> The rich folks need our numbers. WIthout us they have no chance.


I don't see how cryonics can make the transition from being a fringe movement to
being mainstream, without a political confrontation with what we might term 
bio-conservatism. This would include both what are now recognized as 
conservative forces, eg, the Catholic Church, and radicals in the environmental 
movement - most often considered to be on the Left. The more extreme elements in
both camps have used violence. Assassinations of doctors providing abortions 
and attacks on animal labs are examples. 


However, there are also mainstream forces that set the stage for the more 
extreme elements. The mainstream forces complain of resource shortages, eg, 
"Peak Oil", "Global Warming", and, in general, support the view that having less
people would be a good idea. The old "Population Bomb" nonsense is recycled on 
a regular basis:

http://www.ontheissuesmagazine.com/2009fall/2009fall_hartmann.php


These views set the cultural climate and make it easy for the extremists to 
recruit new members. Extremists are also 'used' by the mainstream. An example of
this was the verbal attack on the Tides Foundation by a talk show host that 
resulted in some gun nut hopping in his car and driving off to liquidate the 
employees of the Foundation. Current suspension providers are vulnerable to this
type of vigilante action. Countermeasures against these kinds of threats are 
very expensive and would be a lot more effective with a greater scale of 
operations.


> 
>  I have shown a number of times how the Bible supports cryonics.


There is no evidence that this kind of logical appeal will change attitudes 
toward cryonics. In fact, there is pretty good evidence it will not. 


> Dude, religion is in our GENES. It is there, built-in. Hardwired.


The success of secular ideologies, like communism, argues against this view. 
Inclusion in a meaning defining (sub)culture seems to be what is required.




>  Actually, my messages in this vein are meant for young people who are 
interested in cryonics and may in the future come across my messages. I am 
planting seeds in the brains of future cryos. I am not trying to convince the 
older cryos who already have a set worldview. 


In general, young people consider themselves immortal and will not take action. 
Existential concerns rise in middle age. Once the person has found a 'solution' 
to mortality, then they again stop thinking about the problem. 


So, the best chance of getting someone to enroll is during the middle-age period
of concern. However, accurately targeting this segment is likely to be 
difficult and the magnitude of the mental transition from the conventional to 
the cryonicist view may be too large for the standard marketing approaches. 


Life long involvement in a culture is the normal channel for transmission of 
these types of views. This type of structure is also more likely to be resistant
to financial instability and other types of shocks. So, some new strategy 
involving groups seems necessary. Even extreme individualists function within a 
cultural framework, whether they wish to accept this or not. Therefore, the kind
of dispute we are seeing above is likely to be minimized with a new 
cultural/group strategy for growth. 


dss


David Stodolsky
  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33082