CryoNet #32102 - #32106

CryoNet - Wed 28 Oct 2009

    #32102: Re: CryoNet #32093 [David Stodolsky]
    #32103: Caspar Hare [Ettinger]
    #32104: Re: A new defense of "Me first" [swb1948]

2 message(s) removed from digest due to low reputation.

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32102%2D32106

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32102
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32093
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:53:19 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

On 23 Oct 2009, at 11:00 AM, Keith Henson wrote:

> No matter what we do an awful high
> percentage of the population will be disgusted.  Similar brain
> mechanisms to fear of snakes.

Reactions to cryonics are culturally determined. This is clear from  
the Badger data. Avoidance of death related stimuli is a different  
story (but see below).

There are people who use snakes in their religious ceremonies, so  
reactions to snakes may also be learned.


> There are evolved reasons for this.  Pascal Boyer's book, Religion
> Explained brings up some of them.

As stated in a previous message, this book is totally wrong in its  
analysis of the role of evolution in religious belief. Terror  
management theory shows that there is no need for an evolved  
mechanism, belief is a side effect of human intellectual abilities  
evolved for other reasons.


>
> I think we have to resign ourselves to the fact that cryonics will
> never get very large.  The people who are interested in it are out 5-6
> sigma.

As I showed sometime back, cryonics has been growing exponentially, a  
least until very recently. If there is stagnation, it results from a  
failure to package cryonics appropriately. If suspension was a routine  
procedure, almost everyone would do it, except for a few fanatics like  
those who refuse to have their children vaccinated, etc. About a third  
of people responding to the Omni contest chose cryonics over a  
vacation trip.


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32102

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32103
From: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:04:04 EDT
Subject: Caspar Hare

Mark Plus provided a citation about a book by Caspar Hare offering a  
defense of "solipsism" and egocentricity. Like most other writers, past and  
present,  Hare seems confused.
 
 
(The relation to cryonics is a bit thin, but Mark points out that many  
people have castigated cryonics as "selfish" and therefore "bad.")
 
 
First, although it's not terribly important, Hare shouldn't invent a  new 
meaning for solipsism. The accepted definition is that we don't and can't  
know whether another "person" exists or has an inner life.
 
 
More importantly, he confuses "morality"--ethics-- with individual  
motivation. In YOUNIVERSE I have demonstrated, at least to my own satisfaction,  
that self interest (properly understood) is not only the only conscious  
motivation of everyone, but the only possible motivation, no exceptions. Anyone  
claiming otherwise is simply confused about the nature of satisfaction and 
its  complexities. In extreme brevity--which requires a book to flesh out--if 
you are  consciously motivated (moved) to choose this rather than that, it 
is because (no  exceptions) you believe at the moment that you will enjoy 
this more than that,  or will suffer less with this than with that. (Note the 
word "consciously"--not  all choices are conscious, and unconscious choices 
can arise in several ways,  not necessarily to your or anyone else's 
advantage.)
 
 
It is also important to remember that, to a considerable extent and in  
many circumstances, owing to evolution and indoctrination, the welfare of 
others  is tied to your own in various ways and degrees. The influence of 
cryonics is  certainly ethical from almost any point of view, and in particular 
from the  standpoint of the Golden Rule. Those who expect to live long and 
encounter their  neighbors repeatedly are more motivated to earn the regard of 
others  and not to foul the nest. Those who anticipate a short or/and unhappy 
life are  the ones who are reckless and short-sighted.
 
 
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=32103

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32104
References: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: A new defense of "Me first"
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:08:41 -0400
From: [email protected]

----------MB_8CC252E80EF6603_68D8_8042_webmail-d005.sysops.aol.com


May I also note that, while "Me First" is important for getting people started in cryonics, many cryonicists have too narrow of a world view and unconsciously (or perhaps *consciously* in some extreme cases) interpret that as "Me Only."  In other words, once they have set up arrangements for themselves, they don't care what happens to anyone else.  It's pretty clear that this results in no one else caring about them.

*Successful* cryonics organizations and successful outcomes can only come from a large number of people saying "Me, and my family and my friends and a lot of other people first, all together."  

Steve Bridge

In reply to:Message #32100
From: Mark Plus <[email protected]>
Subject: A new defense of "Me first"?
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:24:55 -0700

(Cryobiologist John Baust reportedly calls cryonics "supreme egotism." Yeah, so? 
Mark Plus.)

You, yourself and you: Why being self-centered is a good thing

http://www.physorg.com/news175767654.html



----------MB_8CC252E80EF6603_68D8_8042_webmail-d005.sysops.aol.com

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32104

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************