X-Message-Number: 479
From att!ruc.dk!david Tue Oct  1 12:46:28 +0100 1991
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 91 12:46:28 +0100
From:  (David Stodolsky)
Message-Id: <>
Subject: re cryonics/humanist

>From email:
>>>>>>
David, it has been my experience that Humanist rank right up there with
Unitarians in their hostility to cryonics. 
<<<<<<

I have been both a Humanist (mostly inactive) and in favor of cryonics without
the least thought that there was any point of conflict. Is there one?


I recall an old saying about the fact that the different factions on the Left in
the USA were always fighting each other. They had no basis for fighting with
people on the Right, of course, since rightists were coming from such totally
different assumptions, that an argument could not really go beyond, "We got it
right, you got it wrong." Not very intellectually satisfying.

It should be realized that active Humanists include many people who are
overcoming the religious orientation. They may just have come to terms with
death as final. Accepting cryonics means they have to reverse again this
emotionally loaded assessment. If cryonics was presented to them before the
first change it could be accepted more easily, in fact it should be easier than
accepting death as final. Another alternative is that of contacting totally
"reeducated" Humanists, who have probably become inactive. They would probably
be hard to reach, because this issue is settled for them and they have moved on
to other things.


Similarly with Unitarians, there is the tension between belief and acceptance of
death as final. I recall a saying, "It is harder to get a Unitarian minister to
tell you whether s/he believes in God, than to get a girl to tell you if she is
a virgin."

Humanists already agree that there is only one life and it's inseparable from
physical existence. This brings Humanists closer to a *reasoned* agreement with

cryonics than theists. Theists are accustomed to holding conflicting beliefs and
so may easily accept cryonics. I would not expect this acceptance to be very
stable (no offence intended). The fact is that the church offers a competing
brand of immortality, Humanism does not.


I think a careful analysis of the social impediments to cryonics would show that
religiously based ideas are of fundamental importance. This could be true even
thought religious people as individuals might not be opposed to cryonics.

If the cryonics movement can convince Humanists that it makes logical sense to
spend their money on suspension, I doubt if any emotional resistance would last
long.

In my earlier message I mentioned the International Ethical Union. It is
actually the International Humanist and Ethical Union.

IHEU office
Oudkerkhof 11
3512 GH Utrecht
The Netherlands

David S. Stodolsky                Messages: + 45 46 75 77 11 x 24 41
Department of Computer Science                 Tel: + 45 31 95 92 82
Bldg. 20.1, Roskilde University Center        Internet: 
Post Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark        Fax: + 45 46 75 42 01

[ David, some time ago Cryonics magazine published Steve Harris' article
  "Many Are Cold But Few Are Frozen: A Humanist Looks at Cryonics", which
  may give more perspective on Humanists vs. Cryonicists.  Also, if I
  recall correctly, Arel Lucas also wrote an article for Cryonics
  magazine (or was it a talk at a Lake Tahoe Life Extension Festival?)
  about her experience presenting cryonics to humanists. - KQB ]

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=479