On Wednesday, March 29, 2000 2:38 AM Geoff Smith geoffs@interchange.ubc.ca
wrote:
> > As you point out, Robert, huge sums of money are already being diverted
to
> > health and longevity issues. In fact the desire for longevity is so
obvious
> > and the profits so sure, that it doesn't seem to me that anything other
> > than the market is needed to make it happen.
>
> I don't think a substantial desire for longevity -- and following from
> that, substantial future profits -- is in the least bit obvious. It may
> seem that way from spending enough time on this list, but in casual
> conversation, I find people are generally opposed (often vehemently) to
> the idea of indefinite lifespan. However, I think the general
> population's opinions on death are highly swayable -- often deathist memes
> are incongruent with the host's own values and beliefs, particularly
> athiests. Often, people's opposition to death is just a bunch of
> unconscious irrationalism: overpopulation concerns, "I will live on
> through my children/ideas", "Near Death Experiences prove the existence of
> an after-life." They just haven't thought about it, and there is no
> widely available information to set them straight.
I agree with the last sentence there. The thing I've found, as I've
mentioned a few days ago here, is that if people are approached the right
way, more agree with life extension then would be obvious. If you ask a
silly (to them) questions -- "Aren't you for immortality?" or "Do you think
we can completely stop and reverse aging?" -- then they are unable to take
that leap, especially if they aging and romanticize death. However, you ask
them "baby steps" questions -- such as "Wouldn't it be nice to get rid of
heart disease?" or "How about undoing the bad aspects of aging, such as
wrinkles and a less active lifestyle?" -- more people agree. I think you
must, in general, the latter should be asked first. Get them used to the
idea of less aging and a longer life, then spring more radical ideas on
them.
> Which brings me back to what Natasha and Robert are saying. People are
> acting against their self-interest. They need to be educated,
> culturally. Plain, old-fashioned marketing. If there is any role for an
> NGO, it is education. Once people are sold on the idea that a greatly
> expanded lifespan is highly valuable for both themselves and most of
> the people around them, the market demand and investment dollars will flow
> naturally. There is a mantra embedded in the collective consciousness,
> "The Internet is the Future." Seeing how that simple hypnotic phrase has
> transformed our economy overnight, I can only imagine what the effects
> would be after embedding a similar suggestion about longevity.
Like Kevin Kelly, I already think there is a market for this stuff. That's
why they are so many products and therapies marketed as "anti-aging."
However, this does not mean it is enough. So, I agree with Geoff here about
doing more through other means, such as an NGO to promote life extension.
Of course, there already are organizations which do so, such as the Life
Extension Foundation (www.lef.org). (I think they do a fine job, especially
with their magazine, product line, funding of research, and legal battles
with the government.) So, those on this list who want to raise
consciousness about this issue in the wider public might consider donating
money to LEF. Or turning other people on to its web site and related
materials.
It would also be nice to have other means to promote the ideas. An
organized effort would be better, especially to counter various pro-death
people and organizations out there. Several years ago, e.g., I read a
letter-to-the-editor by a clergyman in a local paper where I was living at
the time. The guy attacked cryonics as selfish because preserving one's
body in hopes of future revival went against donating organs. It would have
been nice if someone had answered that letter. (I wanted to, at the time,
but was too busy to put together a rejoinder.)
For some of these things, such as responding to letters-to-the-editor or
articles and news stories critical of life extension and immortalism, one
doesn't necessarily need an organization. Just being aware of what's out
there and then reacting to it in a bold yet reasonable manner would help.
For instance, if a newspaper, radio station, TV program, or webcaster covers
a topic in a bad light for our cause, then be ready to contact it and give a
rebuttal -- or pass the information along to those who are willing to do so.
The Media are often quite willing to cover alternative views on the issue,
but one has to let them know we (life extension and transhumanist/Extropian
movements) are here. Ditto for the average person. He or she hasn't heard
our views, for the most part.
(This does not mean one has to become a nag for these ideas -- constantly
boring one's friends, family, and coworkers with life extension ideas.)
I think we can win in the marketplace of ideas.
Daniel Ust
http://mars.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:06:42 MDT