Re: Mike Darwin (Michael Federowicz) wants to turn cryonics into a secret society/cultFebruary 22 2011 at 11:30 AM
|Fundie (Login Fundie)|
Response to Mike Darwin (Michael Federowicz) wants to turn cryonics into a secret society/cult
I support people's right to self-organize into whatever structures they find useful. I deny the right to coercion.
What I got out of this part of the manifesto was Darwin's belief that the existing societies are not working and that the approach to organization needs to be radically rethought with some major out of the box thinking if cryonics is to succeed. I'm not sure he necessarily advocated the creation of a cult, but I could be wrong. Hopefully he wouldn't advocate the brain-washing aspect of cults.
I'll pause here to state my belief that nobody of our era is going to be revived from cryopreservation without taking an extreme level of personal responsibility. Certainly there have always been many people who have done this. But there have also always been many people who wanted to just trust that those offering the service of cryopreservation were the experts and would take care of everything. I'm all for whistling in the dark if that's what makes an individual feel good, but it only takes a little bit of reading to discover the myriad number of things that can go wrong in cryopreservation, things which a person really needs to be concerned about. In the end nothing can eliminate this need for personal responsibility. Not even the magic of "regulation" that some are promising to make all of the ills of cryonics go away.
(I know most people know this. I don't want to sound like I'm lecturing people who have been involved in this since I was born. It's just that it doesn't take much reading to discover that some people are trusting in fate or luck or hope to make it all work out for them, personally.)
Clearly according to Mike Darwin there are issues that are not being handled reliably by the existing cryonics organizations. I know he believes in transparency and openness, at least to an organization's members. But as far as membership and recruitment and passing on information and imparting professionalism and personal responsibility -- I don't think it's untenable to suggest that a more private model might somehow work better than what is out there now. And when it comes to surviving things like government or public attacks on cryonics, or the downfall of current nation-states, secrecy starts to look downright desirable.
Maybe I need to go back and reread the manifesto again to see exactly what he was saying.
I remember clearly a comment to the effect that capitalism wasn't the best way to organize. I support people's right to self-organization, so from a macro standpoint (i.e., all of society) all I see as viable is "capitalism," by which I mean freedom of personal choice. But I definitely believe that that model does not scale downward and that is exactly why freedom needs to exist and needs to be exercised as relationships (including cryonics organizations and other institutions) are organized according to what the participants deem best for their own purposes. If Mike Darwin wanted to start a cryonics monarchy I'd be fine with it as long as he's not coercing people to join, and personally I'd want to strongly examine his case for it before joining.