X-Message-Number: 33394
From:
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:04:06 EST
Subject: comments re Darwin
Content-Language: en
Bob Ettinger writes:
"His analysis of the reasons for slow growth are largely unsupported and
unconvincing, and he leaves out a moderately prominent one--viz., the
embracing by many cryonicists of nonsense such as uploading. econlog.econlib
has a piece by one writer who was turned off cryonics by an advocate who
embraced uploading. I don't have all the relevant figures, but it is clear
(1) that many in cryonics do embrace uploading etc. and (2) that these
fantasies are easy bubbles to prick. "
MD: I'd be really surprised if Bob agreed with me about anything ;-).
However, I'm happy to agree with him in general about issues like uploading.
For myself, I have no strong opinion about whether uploading is possible, in
the sense that Bob suggests that it is not (i.e., that there is a
fundamental difference between biological and non-biological implementations of
people, or perhaps more appropriately that they are not equivalent, and can't
be). What I *do* know is that the viability of uploading is among the least
of my worries right now. That's because I am DYING right NOW, and my most
pressing concerns are staying alive and ensuring (as best I can) that I am
recovered from cryopreservation (if I fail in my efforts at staying alive).
My remarks about "secrecy" have been wildly interpreted - and that's to
the good, if it provokes discussion. And now we have a perfect example of
one of the things cryonicists should learn (or be taught) to keep to
themselves.
While Bob suggests that there are "many" in cryonics who embrace
uploading, the reality is that the idea of uploading, and in particular of "
uploading as soon & inevitable," as well as the idea of the Singularity, are
preventing people who are infested with these idea from becoming cryonicists.
And I have indeed spoken on, and spoken out about this phenomenon at great
length. I call such people "transtemporal communists," because they believe
that a miraculous future is on the verge of materializing, where all of
their needs will be met by the fantastic abilities of tomorrow's Benevolent
Superbeings, who will be ever so anxious to satisfy our every whim and give
us immortality in the bargain, oh yes, and we will have to do absolutely
nothing but sit around and wait for all this to happen.
I'm not suggesting that people should lie about themselves or their
beliefs, but rather that they weigh the utility of making a public issue of
ideas
that are off-putting *when there is no benefit to be had from it.* Rather,
I'm suggesting that they keep their eye on the prize, and be mindful about
the downside to making a public issue about a technology which will in no
way benefit from such discussion, and may in fact, suffer from it!
Ironically, I have heard more than a few in the uploading/TH community complain
about cryonics injuring *their* credibility! Almost everyone has interests or
affiliations which will be off-putting to a broad cross-section of the
population. And virtually everyone has the good sense to know, at least in many
situations, when to keep their mouths shut. Very few people are truly
globally dis-inhibited - and most of those that are, are either
institutionalized, or dead.
RE: Then there is the assertion, more or less, that all publicity is bad
publicity and all media coverage should be avoided. Again, what is lacking
is supporting data. In particular, of those who have joined, what
precipitated their decisions? If it wasn't reading an article or a book or a
web
site, what was it, and what was behind that?
MD: No, Bob, I didn't say anything remotely like that. Indeed, that would
be really ridiculous,coming from me, since *I* heard about cryonics from a
newspaper article about the first anniversary of Bedford's
cryopreservation. Rather, what I am suggesting is much better control over
media encounters
so that the advantage accrues more to cryonics, rather than to the typical
journalist's desire to get (or make) a juicy story. In point of fact, your
example about uploaders is precisely the kind of thing I'm talking about.
I've seen the type of people that all cryonics organizations too often
facilitate coming into contact with the media, and all I can say is, "Wow,
what were you thinking?" I don't even think that I am at all suitable to
interface with the media, and I would not have done so had I any other choice.
Indeed, the record shows that I got out of the media spotlight as soon as I
could. Just being gay and a cryonicist is a liability to cryonics, in my
opinion, because it is just one more "unusual" thing that people can and
will seize on, to keep the idea of cryonics remote from who they are. And this
even applies to other gay people - many of whom were very angry at me in
the 1970s-80s, because my involvement in cryonics was perceived by them
(correctly so) as making the cause of equality and "normalcy" for homosexuals
just that more difficult. As it was, gay rights were never much of an issue
for me, so I didn't have to pick which kind of "unacceptable weird" I
wanted to be. I did have to weigh whether it would be better to be in the
closet or to be "out" and be a prominent person in cryonics, and the best
advice I had at the time was not to hide it (and thus make a liability of it)
but not to make an issue out of it, either. I think that was good advice for
a situation I would rather have not had to deal with at all.
Mike Darwin
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ]
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=33394
Warning: This message was filtered from the daily CryoNet digest
because the poster sent too many messages per digest.
It thus may need to be rated.