X-Message-Number: 26854
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:32:35 -0600
From: anthony <>
Subject: anonymity
References: <>

Dr. Stodolsky and Charles Platt are quite right in what they say about 
the uses and value of anonymity. Stodolsky's links make especially 
edifying reading. I'd like to add a little something to this debate by 
pointing out one good use of anonymity among many:

In recent decades, a philosopher conducted an interview anonymously. 
During the course of the dialogue, he expressed the wish to publish his 
work anonymously, because "the effects of the book might land in 
unexpected places and form shapes that I had never thought of. A name 
makes reading too easy."

The point that was being made is that a person's name can lead to 
pre-judgements about what has been written. People often stick to who 
they know and do not explore the work's of others because the reputation 
of the name puts them off. Identity can inform, but it can also distort 
an objective assessment of a person's works. This is why I have not 
mentioned the philosophers name, so this idea can stand alone.

He suggested that for one year everything is published anonymously, so 
as to level the enthusiasm people have for persons famously or 
immediately identifiable and also to give writers who were unknown a 
chance to be assessed alongside those who were well known.

(If you want to know the name of the anonymous philosopher, just google 
"the masked philosopher").

Of course there are many writers who have published critical or 
"immoral" works anonymously or using pseudonyms so as to protect 
themselves. To be easily identifiable can make one a target, especially 
in a political climate of persecution.

To address Kitty's post:

 > If anyone has criticism
> of the assumptions or reasoning in those essays, then post a critique to any

> appropriate public forum (after reading the essays of course, which is 
doubtful was

> done by the writer of the message to which this is a reply). Doing so at 
MoreLife
> Yahoo is welcomed if the posting requirements are met.

As a requirement for posting is the revealing of identity, is it not 
therefore impossible for someone who wishes to argue the value of 
anonymity to do so while remaining anonymous? Perhaps such a poster 
would only be obliged to reveal who they were if their case for 
anonymity was not convincing? Otherwise they're compromised in advance, 
even if they are correct.

Finally - what of the cryonicists who have requested anonymity? Are 
there any valid reasons for this request, or should it be denied? Is it 
not a person's right to withhold information from others?

Anthony

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26854