X-Message-Number: 30508 From: David Stodolsky <> Subject: Re: Longevity attitudes and reactions to cryonics Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:05:13 +0100 References: <> On 19 Feb 2008, at 15:42, 2Arcturus wrote: > >> >> First, Personal >> Emotional Rejection, or what is called reflexive avoidance or >> attentional withdrawal in terror management theory. . . . This >> reflexive >> avoidance shows why direct marketing of cryonics is ineffective and >> that the focus on death avoidance may be counter productive. > > David, > > So what do you suggest to handle "attentional withdrawal"? Since this is an evolutionary given, nothing can be done to handle it. The only option is to avoid the death issue. The data suggest that the focus should be on utopian vision. The Badger results suggest these items will sell: I'm excited about the prospect of waking up in a body made young again through bio-technological advances. I look forward to a time when we won't have to suffer the loss of our friends and family because of aging and disease. The Kogan results suggest emphasizing these: Extend [life] even if prolonging chronic illness Long Term Relationship quality will increase with longevity Increase budget for this research Longevity research as duty to future generations Society will benefit from greater wisdom Traditional churches do this by promising paradise in the afterlife. Then, attention is directed toward bettering individual virtue and serving the community. Thus, attention is filled by efforts at improving the self and the community. The protestant work ethic is one example. Christians typically regard Christ on the cross as a symbol of salvation, not as a representation of someone being tortured to death. So, it seems you can have reminders of death right before peoples' eyes and they simply don't see it for what it is. While there have been efforts to present life in the future as utopian by cryonicists, this type of speculation is clearly not something that should be promoted by cryonics organizations. They need to be extremely conservative in making any kind of claims as to the benefits of their services. Therefore, some other type of organization is needed, that can approach the kind of claims made by churches. While the conflict with research is less clear, such activities have typically been placed in other organizations or locations. This seems necessary for safety, legal, and financial reasons > > > Also, could you explain more about the idea of handling cryonics > through a foundation rather than through individual insurance > policies? I missed that discussion I believe. > > Greg This is a complicated topic, so it would be better for someone who works in this area explain it. I can give a simplified example. Let's say the income tax is 50% and someone donates 10% of their income to the fellowship/foundation: Donation = 10 Expense after taxes = 5 (.5 x 10) Foundation allocates 5 to current benefits and 5 to a suspension fund. Therefore, the after tax impact is null (Expense after taxes = current benefits) and the suspension rapidly becomes prepaid. With a $100,000 yearly income, you would have $30,000 in the suspension fund after 6 years. Since it would be a collective agreement, new members would be covered immediately. Since new members would typically live for more than 6 years, they would generated reserves for the suspension fund. So, this allows prepayment through a collective agreement rather than individual insurance policies. This results in substantial economies of scale, as well as securing tax benefits, if it is set up with an appropriate legal structure. dss David Stodolsky Skype: davidstodolsky Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30508