X-Message-Number: 33086 Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:37:52 -0700 Subject: Re: Chastising Charles From: Keith Henson <> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 3:00 AM, From: David Stodolsky <> wrote: > On 27 Nov 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote: snip >> 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. Not really. Communism apparently can occupy the "mental site" that is usually filled with conventional religions. The ability to pick up a religion or something in that class can still be hardwired by evolution. Decades back I proposed that you could measure how much some belief is like a religion by seeing how much having belief "A" competed with having a conventional religion. This is based on an analogy to cell molecular docking sites and how much (for example) opiates compete with endorphins. >> 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. This is an accurate analysis. And when you think about it, it is probably the best way to deal with the situation humans (prior to the current era) could do. > 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. You are probably right. > 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. The most receptive group currently around is the transhumanists. And even there, the percentage penetration is not high. Keith Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33086