X-Message-Number: 5156
From:  (David Stodolsky)
Subject: World without death not wanted
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 95 17:56:20 +0100

Kastenbaum, R. (1992).
The Psychology of Death (2nd ed.)
NY: Springer. (p 49)

Over 600 persons attending conferences, workshops, or courses focusing
on death were asked to consider the implications of a world without death.

Respondents were given the following instructions:
"Suppose that the world is just as we know it, with one exception:
Death is no longer inevitable. Diseases and aging have been conquered.
Let us also suppose that air and water pollution have been much reduced
through new technologies...."

"Only 1 of 20 respondents portrayed the general consequences as prevailingly
favorable. Most respondents (aprox 70%) did not find *any* positives."

G+) The positives mentioned were:
1) society could keep its wise and experienced people
2) money not tied up in life insurance or wasted on funerals
3) societies would become more flexible and sensitive to each other
and to their own subgroups because more people could learn more about
alternative ways of life
4) religious institutions would have less social power
5) some career opportunities would improve

G-) Negatives most frequently mentioned were: 
1) overcrowding
2) enforced birth control
3) more oppressive discrimination, elitism, and power politics
4) society becoming overly conservative and losing its adaptability
5) economic structures and processes would change drastically (mostly
in a negative direction)
6) moral beliefs would be undermined.


When the perspective was shifted from the general to the personal
about 80% were tempted by freedom from death, but over half were still
opposed to a world without death. 
P+) The positives were:
1) liberation from fear of death
2) preservation of valued relationships
3) opportunity for continued personal growth

P-) The negatives were:
1) abundance of time would sap motivation
2) religious faith and guidance would be undermined
3) death is necessary as a part of God's plan
4) prolonged life would lead to aging and deterioration.


The first thing to be said about these results is that they suggest
that information materials from cryonics organizations are much too
narrow. These usually assume that the reader has already decided that
death is undesirable. It also appears that respondents could not imagine
the situation, "Diseases and aging have been conquered", as instructed,
since that was still listed as a personal negative (P- number 4).

The jump in those viewing a world without death as favorable 
from 5% in the general condition, to 50% in the personal condition, suggests
why individualists are attracted to cryonics. Individualists would tend
to regard personal consequences much more important than general
ones. If we look at the general negatives 1 and 2, and probably 3
and 4, these would be less bothersome to those seeing space colonization
as an option. This might explain the why SF conventions are good sales
locations.

One of the general positives (G+ 2) does not benefit cryonics, which
costs even more money than conventional internment. G- 5 suggests that
future changes in economic structures should be down played.
The more extreme economic views expressed on this List would likely
have the effect of putting off the typical respondent. (These might also
trigger concerns G- 3, 4, & 6).

The personal negatives 2 & 3 (also G- 6) suggest a major role of religion
in forming peoples attitudes in this area. This also suggests a much
wider information strategy, if resistance is to be overcome. There
is a gap of 30% between those tempted and those positive toward a
world without death.

Fears of overcrowding have no basis in reality, if trends in the industrialized
countries are examined. This, of course, assumes poverty elimination and
stabilization of the situation in developing countries. However, it
seems widely accepted that population growth is a major problem. This
combined with the importance of religious concerns, raises the question
as to whether the cryonics organizations are an appropriate vehicle
for the educational effort needed to change the above listed negative
attitudes toward a world without death. Such an effort is needed, since
almost all respondents view a world without death as a bad idea in 
general, and most view it as a bad idea personally.



The second edition of this book is a complete rewrite, and is well worth a read.
The author works in Arizona as do Greenberg, et al, authors of an earlier
cited article on terror management theory. Maybe ALCOR could attempt to 

involve these people. The above research is pretty old now, and it is primitive,
compared to what is needed for a serious public education/marketing effort.

dss

David S. Stodolsky      Euromath Center     University of Copenhagen
   Tel.: +45 38 33 03 30   Fax: +45 38 33 88 80 (C)


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5156