I appreciate your point. I actually didn’t mean trying to do a hard sell of cryonics, but just to present it in the most sympathetic way possible (which I’m sure was not at all clear, since this piece is still a draft and I never meant to post it).
Appeals to justice and fair treatment are far more effective when the suffering parties are seen sympathetically.
I remember this one time I read an article about an issue with the Anglican church here. This church as a whole is very socially liberal in Canada, a-ok with gay marriages or whatever, that kind of thing. But there was this one local congregation that was socially conservative, and they were all, “we wanna leave cuz that’s morally wrong” or whatever. And the main church is like, “Fine, but our organization owns the building, so we’re taking our ball and going home,” and the local congregation goes, “But that church is our community’s. Our ancestors were the ones who originally paid for it, and they’d agree with us about this!”
And I go, “Hm, yup, my sense of justice and fair treatment say the local congregation is in the right. If the decision was my responsibility, I’d have to give the building to them.”
But it’s not my responsibility, and I certainly never felt any impulse to try to make it. Because those homophobic nutjobs are a bunch of jerks and I can’t wait to see the historical back of them, so… how much can I really bring myself to care?
And I’m pretty sure I’m much better than the average individual at applying consistent standards of fairness even to people I don’t like.
Anyway yeah, a simple elegant sympathetic presentation of cryonics should be best for appealing to anyone who’d listen to the ″tolerant compliance” angle, as well as planting seeds for full support of cryonics in a fair portion of those people.
I appreciate your point. I actually didn’t mean trying to do a hard sell of cryonics, but just to present it in the most sympathetic way possible (which I’m sure was not at all clear, since this piece is still a draft and I never meant to post it).
Appeals to justice and fair treatment are far more effective when the suffering parties are seen sympathetically.
I remember this one time I read an article about an issue with the Anglican church here. This church as a whole is very socially liberal in Canada, a-ok with gay marriages or whatever, that kind of thing. But there was this one local congregation that was socially conservative, and they were all, “we wanna leave cuz that’s morally wrong” or whatever. And the main church is like, “Fine, but our organization owns the building, so we’re taking our ball and going home,” and the local congregation goes, “But that church is our community’s. Our ancestors were the ones who originally paid for it, and they’d agree with us about this!”
And I go, “Hm, yup, my sense of justice and fair treatment say the local congregation is in the right. If the decision was my responsibility, I’d have to give the building to them.”
But it’s not my responsibility, and I certainly never felt any impulse to try to make it. Because those homophobic nutjobs are a bunch of jerks and I can’t wait to see the historical back of them, so… how much can I really bring myself to care?
And I’m pretty sure I’m much better than the average individual at applying consistent standards of fairness even to people I don’t like.
Anyway yeah, a simple elegant sympathetic presentation of cryonics should be best for appealing to anyone who’d listen to the ″tolerant compliance” angle, as well as planting seeds for full support of cryonics in a fair portion of those people.