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