X-Message-Number: 3067 From: (Thomas Donaldson) Subject: CRYONICS: re messages 6 Sept 94 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 07:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Hi again! To Mike: The last time I looked at Greg's work he wasn't as far along. I'm very pleased and want to thank you for filling us in on it, as much as Greg is willing to publish. I do want to point out that there is a difference between being willing to give money in support of research and being willing to give $10,000 in support of research. Nowhere in my posting did I say that I didn't want to contribute. Furthermore, the information you provided looks more hopeful than I thought the situation was when I wrote up my last message, and that strongly affects how much I would be willing to donate. Finally, about the Mormons I still disagree. As individuals they are far from the iconoclasts your message makes them seem. That is because they have a large organization and a long history behind them. It is one thing to go out TOTALLY ALONE and spend $10,000 or 10% of one's income (either one) on an idea in which you believe which will NOT return any money to you (ie. not an invest- ment) and quite another to know that you are among a large number of other people who have done and will do the same. That is why I said we were not like the Mormons are NOW (unless a lot more people have signed up for cryonics than I know). But it is fair to compare us to the EARLY Mormons. To Bob Ettinger: I knew you wouldn't like it when I said that ideally the money should not be funnelled through CI. That sounds like a hard thing to say, but I was not referring to the personalities or morality of anyone involved now. At the same time, even the Constitution of the US was written with a sense that the way something is done can or cannot present terrible temptations to those doing it. Giving money to CI for research would presently be done with no strings or constraints attached. THAT'S VERY UNSAFE. We know very well, besides, how groups can show much less morality than the individuals who make them up, so temptation is even more a problem. NOR DO I WANT TO BECOME A CZAR OF RESEARCH MYSELF. As most net readers know, recently I set up an Institute for Neural Cryobiology, which again is qualif- ied to receive donations, etc. However if and when this Institute is ever in a position to support research I would want a good deal more feedback to those who donate and from those who donate than it now has. And I would want that set up IN ADVANCE. (If it weren't set up in advance, there will always be the temptation not to bother, since so many other things are more pressing.....) One cause of the recent split in Alcor came directly from this issue. Those who complained had a genuine problem in mind; discussing it, unfortunately, became impossible because the issue became far too enmeshed with particular personalities, which it should not be. Moreover, in practical terms it may have been solved when Biopreservation and the other groups formed outside Alcor. Alcor now has a kind of feedback consisting of those who leave Alcor and join another group (though it's still possible to discuss whether that's really the best way). Anyone who has ever studied control theory will know immediately what I mean and why I say these things. I am NOT discussing individuals, and when I say that a situation is tempting, I include myself as one of those who might in the end give way to temptation. Finally, on determinism: I believe that Bob is neglecting thermodynamics. Ultimately that's why even determinism does not mean that we can recover everyone. Long long life, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3067