X-Message-Number: 33274
From: 
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 01:24:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Two professors

Those  presumably best qualified to express opinions about growth of  
cryonics are social psychologists. Two of these are members of the Cryonics  
Institute who do not hide their affiliation--Dr. Ronald G. Havelock and Dr.  

David S. Stodolsky. the former previously at the University of Michigan and the
 latter presently at the University of Copenhagen. They are poles apart in 
their  views, as I read them. 
 
Dr. Stodolsky's main thrust seems to be that cryonics is doomed to slow  
growth until we can effect a basic change in public attitudes, which might be  
done with a couple of million dollars worth of public relations efforts. He 
 also, it appears to me, puts misleading emphasis on the role of religion. 
He  emphasizes "terror management," the terror in question being related to 
attacks  on one's world view. 
 
Dr. Havelock's views are given in his recent book, ACCELERATION, which I am 
 in the process of reading and will review in due course. The thrust is 
that  basic historical forces are at work putting the wind at our backs, and 
improving  in recent decades and years. I agree with  most of what he writes, 
but have  not yet decided on the quantitative usefulness of his formulation. 
At the least,  he offers a good antidote to the seeping poison so 
widespread. 
 
There is entertainment here as well as potential armament. If more of us  
(you) buy the book and promote it, we (you) will be striking a righteous  
blow.
 
Robert Ettinger
 

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33274