38 replies to this topic

[rwac]

$5 Million Grant Awarded by Private Foundation to Study Immortality

The John Templeton Foundation grant to UC Riverside philosopher John Fischer will fund research on aspects of immortality, including near-death experiences and the impact of belief in an afterlife on human behavior

By Bettye Miller on July 31, 2012

The John Templeton Foundation has awarded philosopher John Martin Fischer $5 million to study issues related to immortality.

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — For millennia, humans have pondered their mortality and whether death is the end of existence or a gateway to an afterlife. Millions of Americans have reported near-death or out-of-body experiences. And adherents of the world’s major religions believe in an afterlife, from reincarnation to resurrection and immortality.

Anecdotal reports of glimpses of an afterlife abound, but there has been no comprehensive and rigorous, scientific study of global reports about near-death and other experiences, or of how belief in immortality influences human behavior. That will change with the award of a three-year, $5 million grant by the John Templeton Foundation to John Martin Fischer, distinguished professor of philosophy at the University of California, Riverside, to undertake a rigorous examination of a wide range of issues related to immortality. It is the largest grant ever awarded to a humanities professor at UC Riverside, and one of the largest given to an individual at the university.

“People have been thinking about immortality throughout history. We have a deep human need to figure out what happens to us after death,” said Fischer, the principal investigator of The Immortality Project. “Much of the discussion has been in literature, especially in fantasy and science fiction, and in theology in the context of an afterlife, heaven, hell, purgatory and karma. No one has taken a comprehensive and sustained look at immortality that brings together the science, theology and philosophy.”

The John Templeton Foundation, located near Philadelphia, supports research on subjects ranging from complexity, evolution and infinity to creativity, forgiveness, love, and free will.

Half of the $5 million grant will be awarded for research projects. The grant will also fund two conferences, the first of which will be held at the end of the project’s second year and the second at the end of the grant period. A website will include a variety of resources, from glossaries and bibliographies to announcements of research conferences and links to published research. Some recent work in Anglo-American philosophy will be translated for German philosophers who, in the last 30 years, have been increasingly studying the work of American philosophers.

UC Riverside Chancellor Timothy P. White said Fischer’s research “takes a universal concern and subjects it to rigorous examination to sift fact from fiction. His work will provide guidance for discussion of immortality and the human experience for generations to come. We are extremely proud that he is leading the investigation of this critical area of knowledge.”

Noting Fischer’s renown as a scholar of free will and moral responsibility, Stephen Cullenberg, dean of the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, said, “There is perhaps no one better suited to lead a multidisciplinary research project on the question of immortality and its social implications. The Templeton Foundation’s generous support will enable scholars from across the world to come to UCR to investigate how the question of immortality affects all cultures, albeit in different ways.”

Anecdotal reports of near-death experiences, out-of-body experiences and past lives are plentiful, but it is important to subject these reports to careful analysis, Fischer said. The Immortality Project will solicit research proposals from eminent scientists, philosophers and theologians whose work will be reviewed by respected leaders in their fields and published in academic and popular journals.

“We will be very careful in documenting near-death experiences and other phenomena, trying to figure out if these offer plausible glimpses of an afterlife or are biologically induced illusions,” Fischer said. “Our approach will be uncompromisingly scientifically rigorous. We’re not going to spend money to study alien-abduction reports. We will look at near-death experiences and try to find out what’s going on there — what is promising, what is nonsense, and what is scientifically debunked. We may find something important about our lives and our values, even if not glimpses into an afterlife.”

Fischer noted that while philosophers and theologians have pondered questions of immortality and life after death for millennia, scientific research into immortality and longevity are very recent. The Immortality Project will promote collaborative research between scientists, philosophers and theologians. A major goal will be to encourage interdisciplinary inquiry into the family of issues relating to immortality — and how these bear on the way we conceptualize our own (finite) lives.

One of the questions he hopes researchers will address is cultural variations in reports of near-death experiences. For example, the millions of Americans who have experienced the phenomenon consistently report a tunnel with a bright light at the end. In Japan, reports often find the individual tending a garden.

“Is there something in our culture that leads people to see tunnels while the Japanese see gardens?” he asked. “Are there variations in other cultures?” What can we learn about our own values and the meanings of our finite lives by studying near-death experiences cross-culturally (as well as within our own culture)?

Other questions philosophers may consider are: Is immortality potentially worthwhile or not? Would existence in an afterlife be repetitive or boring? Does death give meaning to life? Could we still have virtues like courage if we knew we couldn’t die? What can we learn about the meaning of our lives by thinking about immortality?

Theologians and philosophers who examine various concepts of an afterlife may delve into the relationship between belief in life after death and individual behavior, and how individuals could survive death as the same person.

“Many people and religions hold there is an afterlife, and that often gives people consolation when faced with death,” Fischer said. “Philosophy and theology are slightly different ways to bring reason to beliefs about religion to evaluate their rationality. If you believe we exist as immortal beings, you could ask how we could survive death as the very same person in an afterlife. If you believe in reincarnation, how can the very same person exist if you start over with no memories?

“We hope to bring to the general public a greater awareness of some of the complexities involved in simple beliefs about heaven, hell and reincarnation, and encourage people to better understand and evaluate their own beliefs about an afterlife and the role of those beliefs in their lives.”
For example, “We think that free will is very important to us theologically and philosophically. And heaven in the Judeo-Christian tradition is supposed to be the best place. Yet we arguably wouldn’t have free will in heaven. How do you fit these ideas together?”

At the end of the project Fischer will analyze findings from the Immortality Project and write a book with the working title “Immortality and the Meaning of Death,” slated for publication by Oxford University Press.

The John Templeton Foundation serves as a philanthropic catalyst for discoveries relating to the Big Questions of human purpose and ultimate reality. The foundation supports research on subjects ranging from complexity, evolution and infinity to creativity, forgiveness, love, and free will. It encourages civil, informed dialogue among scientists, philosophers and theologians, and between such experts and the public at large, for the purposes of definitional clarity and new insights. The foundation’s vision is derived from the late Sir John Templeton’s optimism about the possibility of acquiring “new spiritual information” and from his commitment to rigorous scientific research and related scholarship. The foundation’s motto, “How little we know, how eager to learn,” exemplifies its support for open-minded inquiry and its hope for advancing human progress through breakthrough discoveries.

http://ucrtoday.ucr.edu/7496
http://www.sptimmortalityproject.com/

Edited by rwac, 05 August 2012 - 01:29 AM.

[Droplet]

Very interesting and whilst I don't discount an afterlife, it's a shame he isn't putting funding into what we're doing too.

[Eternalist]

Exactly, even if there was an afterlife, it would exist regardless of us knowing about it or not. So it won't improve our chances for immortality, unless nde's are shown to be nothing more than a natural phenomenon. In that case, maybe some people may give up afterlife hopes and concentrate on life extension instead, but I doubt it.

[Droplet]

In that case, maybe some people may give up afterlife hopes and concentrate on life extension instead, but I doubt it.

Sometimes it feels as though only a handful of people are supporting life extension, even though I know that's not the case.

[Julia36]

There's an application in to Templeton for a grant for Quantum Archaeology...resurrecting the dead by technology
:

https://sites.google...tumarchaeology/

[Danail Bulgaria]

If I understood corectly, this man has been given five million dollars to investigate anecdotal reports of near-death experiences, out-of-body experiences and past lives. Did I understand it well? If so, I wonder who can be dull enough to imbune 5 000 000 dollars in such a stupid and useless topic.

[Julia36]

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

[Danail Bulgaria]

Yes, Horatio, Yes, especailly many are the money fot this stupid project

[Julia36]

It is because you think religion is anti-science?

It has been unfortunately, in many respects.

But it has bourne man on its back for 1000's of years, and although it has harmed many by dogma and bigotry, it has helped many by healing and charity.

Medical missions would collapse if not for the religions.

New ideas are needed to mend the old and new to merge the good in both of them.

The dying need to be comforted; the sick consoled, the bereaved brought Hopefulness.

Science may be on the verge of showing resurrection and immortality is viable.

To ignore those charitable souls whose life is spent serving others is surely not good?

Man;s understanding is fallible...it is based on his instruments of reasoned thought and not absolute.

What counts is being decent to each other and pushing technology forward.

Why shouldn't people investigate the afterlife with their own money?

I bet you watch Dracula!

[Danail Bulgaria]

Well, stopgam, I really think, that the religion is an absolute antiscience.

I also believe, that it has been stopping the science since its creation until today.

I will actually give You an example, that noone denies: Before the modern religions to infiltrate the world, the greeks have discovered, that the world is round. Can You imagine that? After the religions came popular, the fact, that the earth is round deminished and for the questionable 1000 years, that You roar about everybody was impaled, that the earth is flat, and the astronomy was claimed as antireligeous. Do You know what does it means to be stopped a science for 1000 + years? Can You imagine it? I will tell You what does it means. It means, that the maya's calendar is as accurate as today calendars that we use. This means stopping the astronomy for a 1000 years. Does Your 1000s mind knows, that the religion has refused to accept that the dinosurs existed, and that still there are religeous psychos, that are trying to convince the people, that the world is not millions, but several thousand years old?

If You claim, that the medical missions would collapse if not for the religions, then how do You explain the anti - science religeous wall that tries to emerge infront of the most important medical discoveries, such as the blood transfusion, the transplantation, (especially the hearet transplantations) and today - the stem cells, the terapeutic cloning, the idea for "altering our lifes so to make them longer", the genetics as general, the immortality as an idea, and others.

New ideas are needed to mend the old. Do You know how many will come from the religion? I will tell You - 0.

Thoughts like that: "The dying need to be comforted; the sick consoled, the bereaved brought Hopefulness." may be one of the reasons we still to be mortal.

Science may be on the verge of showing resurrection and immortality is viable.
OK, when this idea comes out of the verge and resurects a human come and tell me, that I am wrong

To ignore those charitable souls whose life is spent serving others is surely not good? No it is good. But I accept the scientists, not the religeous people as charitable souls.

Man;s understanding is fallible...it is based on his instruments of reasoned thought and not absolute, so what? Do not believe the science? Believe the church, that relies on fraud and psychos?

What counts is being decent to each other and pushing technology forward.
Will You please give me an example of religion pushing the technology worward? Thanks in advance!

Why shouldn't people investigate the afterlife with their own money?
Well, maybe because the afterlife does not exist, and if it exists, we will be there with certainity. On this way investigating the question if there is an afterlife or not looses its meaning.

Ya, I watched Drakula, and gues what! I hope not to stress You with the fact, that it is not a scientific movie.

[Logic]

Why not phone the guy and explain that the money could be better spent..?

[Julia36]

seivtcho there are bad bits to religion...dogma is one. But are4 you saying there are NO good bits?


We need to save the good.

Science can be dogmatic too as I am finding out.

But all this is Man...Man's stupidity.

To set up adversarial combat between religion and science when they are examining different things by different rules seems dimwitted.

If I believe in a supreme creator and an all pervasive good that my mind can feel but which is non materialist...what harm does that do while it comforts me?

Or if as a member of a religious community I use science to cure the sick as I pray fro them....isn't that a compatible good?

The horros have been men, arrogant, power hungry men stupid men, who have risen inside a system by playing it's politics, and once in power have ordered atrocities.

Science has done much in the way of killing you'll agree.

Men without God can do wicked things as well as men in the name of God.

the issuie is Man's nature

Would you accpet that these are good:

Singin

Praying

moral affrimations
Fellowshipo
rituals.
helping the poor
Visiting the sick
Baptising, burying, marrying and other ceremonies
Comforting the dying

Priests are poorly paid social workers.

We must check religious abuses by simply checking abuses in general.

But we must also check sceintism abuses like drug companies pushing useless drugs on people (this is really an evil of capitalism)

All the things religions do of course, can be done outside religion....but where are they done thus?

I mean right now.

For centuries the mentally ill were only cared for by the church.

My priest uncle died on mission in a leper colony in China.

When science came of course leprosy left.

But what do we do until it comes, Pray

Edited by stopgam, 21 December 2012 - 12:23 AM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

I can only say, that this way of thinking will definatelly not lead You to the immortality.

[Julia36]

merry Christmas seivtcho,

I dont think science and religion are enemies but part of a debate.

Where do scientists deal with emotional support for homeless peoples?

Where does religion research diseases?

We need everything we've got to exist.....psychologically as well as physically.

The Templeton Foundation helps address issues of unity.

There are many things wrong in science and religion.

[Julia36]

This is my first contact with capitalism.

Does it work?

[Julia36]

I can only say, that this way of thinking will definatelly not lead You to the immortality.

Well take out Roger Bacon, William of Ockham Max Planck, Newton (degree in divinity) Darwin (degree in religion) Copernicus

and dont forget SHELDRAKE..he is religious but utterly nuts.

I'm not against atheists...just I dont want to be stopped worshiping so long as I dont stop anyone anesthetizing.

Dawkins is also nuts but at least he serious and thinks science has all the answers..no dogma there then. I have chatted to them and on the whole Sheldrake is nuttier. One's from Oxford (trans. Harvard) the other's from Cambridge (trans. Yale)

Afraid you're left with Einstein who was truly great, with a dodgy private life, and Neils Boihr who was truly great and a boring egoist who refused to hear Hugh Everet out..

Hey you KNOW there's no meaning to life...so to live you have to be ruddy NUTS!

Religion and science are compatible here:

Religion helps you be nuts in an OK way and science gives you some trying to do.

Wanting to live at all is a mental illness.

Wanting to die is also one.

the only thing that;s left is conquest of space, of death of self it doesn't matter we all end up washing to dishes


There's only one question for me:

What do YOU want to do?

If you need others to help achieve it there's the problem.

Because soon people are going to be woken from cryonic suspension and given their own universe...total massive universe with massive A.I.'s armies and angels the lot.

I dont know how that will pan out i the USA but in Europe you'll get one when you sign on.

[Danail Bulgaria]

If You want to live longer or to be immortal the only way to do it is by science.

Forget about the religion for this issue.

I will give You an example how You are deviating from the correct path with the help of the philosophy or the religeous thinking. I noticed, that You have written, that "Wanting to live at all is a mental illness" This is entirely not medically proven. Moreover, based on the natural self - protecting instinct, it is actually easier to be proved the opposite - that wanting to live is not an ilness. But this non medically proven thought, that it is an ilness may stop You while searching a way to live longer.

[Julia36]

I will give You an example how You are deviating from the correct path with the help of the philosophy or the religeous thinking. I noticed, that You have written, that "Wanting to live at all is a mental illness" This is entirely not medically proven. Moreover, based on the natural self - protecting instinct, it is actually easier to be proved the opposite - that wanting to live is not an ilness. But this non medically proven thought, that it is an ilness may stop You while searching a way to live longer.

I am persuaded by your logic seivtcho. from the parasigms the paradigms of our human society. You are generally correct.

People suffer from the
lazarus long delusion




LAZARUS LONG DELUSION

I'M OLD, I DONT WANT TO RESURRECT. (THE LAZARUS LONG DELUSION).
You can only have unbiased judgment in a state of well-being, on the whole. But the mind in the body suffering, deludes itself of its impartiality.
A surprising number of people dont want resurrection unaware of this delusion. I have found only two reasons for this:

1. When young they realized death was inevitable and so have programmed themselves to accept death. Challenging it causes revolution in the psyche;

2. They are unaware of the body's effect on their reasoning. They haven't read Time Enough For Love by Robert Heinlein. Lazarus Long is centuries old and commits suicide. Before complete, police bots find and rejuvenate him. He feels great and wants to live again. This must happen to everyone I believe because we are beings bonded by biological urges that filter into us as our mind.


Nature has built us with a progressive death wish as we age to make degeneracy into death bearable. Some Freudians call it Thanatos. Libido is what you see in young animals bouncing around. When you resurrected back to youth your body will be full of libido and you will want to live without any psychology or argument from quantum archaeologists.
People confuse death with the cessation of suffering. You cant need to die to stop suffering: to stop suffering you have to get to full health and peace.
The only honest way to test it is to try both states:
Try being dead and try being young again - and see which you prefer!
I'm not kidding. That should be possible in systems well within quantum archaeology's skills.
Some people are locked in ego and may find it hard to believe their essential tastes and drives are products of their biology, their biology is a product of chemistry and their chemistry of the laws of physics.
Some organized groups centuries old will challenge this, but my experience of studying them is they change where they have, to in order to survive. When people are resurrected in front of your eyes, false assumptions will crumble and the groups change or membership will ebb away.

The profound change in our psyche is that death doesn't exist, soon aging and ill health as we know it wont exist, and everything we have accepted as immutable facts of philosophy will be laughed at: "In those days you n know people used to die...can you imagine thinking you could ever die?"
The word will have to take on a new meaning to have any meaning at all.
Quantum Archaeology is not a challenge to morality, it is one of the most moral attempts so far in man's technology.

WHY YOU SHOULDN'T COMMIT SUICIDE.


Seneca, an early humanist, was forced to commit suicide by the Emperor adapted here in Caligula (1979)

1. Because suffering is going to be reversed. You wont have had it. the present you is not the final judge of reality. Like winding a film of history back, history is likely to be changed and the suffering taken out, without any loss of identity. This is a hard area in philosophy and outside the scope of this essay.
2. Because you wont have any say in what the world will become.

3. Because QA is NOT certain.
4. Because suicide doesn't give you rest, or relief: you cease to exist.

If you die, you will probably be resurrected, but the world in which you surface will be built by other people using artificially intelligent machines.

Your return is unlikely to be unconditional at first: you will have to obey the laws that have evolved while you where not there.

The maximum game strategy is to survive as long as you can. Many will not have to die but just get rejuvenation. They will be able to control investments and some may influence policy.

Suiciding out might only be useful as last resort, attempting it is illegal in many nations. Feeling you dont want to live is a normal part of the spectrum of human emotions.

Depressed we have the Lazarus Long delusion -.that life isn't worth it, but undepressed we dont feel that at all. If depression persists you could have a treatable illness and should seek help. Over the counter anti-depressants can lift someone out of suffering quickly.

There is a cost/benefit judgement of living/ not living, but QA certainly must be part of that process.
Logically, there is no longer a terminal illness.

Main Site:
Quantum Archaeology






In mitigation there ARE philosophies that hold to do anything is foolish as free will is a subjective illusion. Others that determinism is a man-made construct.

Philosophy enables argument about most positions.
Hegasius was banned from preaching suicide in Alexandria as his followers killed themselves.

Napoleon on his death bed painted by Vernet

Napoleon's tomb Paris. Hitler brought Napoleon II to the mausoleum in 1940 and buried his remains.
They are still dying, technically.


Arg! Its possible to argue anything in philosophy.

Maybe true wisdom as Gilbran said is always bowing before that of a child's.

You dont think a human could ever chose death dispassionately and not suffering or old?
Like you I chose life, but it is a philosophical position I've take, like 'science can become is a complete description of things'

.

[YOLF]

Just skimming but... how do near death experiences and beliefs in an afterlife relate to our kind of immortality? It seems both relate more to accepting death and having children. I don't think this is positive for our topic.

Very interesting and whilst I don't discount an afterlife, it's a shame he isn't putting funding into what we're doing too.

[Julia36]

I dont feel qialified to answer but I know we haven't a ral graps of the world its quantum states, the universe is only maped to 4% superficially.

If the quantum nind exists as Penrose and Hammerhoof ceonjecture, then the mind may be far mor complex than beleived.

Quantum calculators have now been found in plants.

My pwn near death experineces are I voited republican.

Edited by stopgam, 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM.

[Droplet]

Just skimming but... how do near death experiences and beliefs in an afterlife relate to our kind of immortality? It seems both relate more to accepting death and having children. I don't think this is positive for our topic.

Very interesting and whilst I don't discount an afterlife, it's a shame he isn't putting funding into what we're doing too.

Well all I'm saying is that I do not discount an afterlife and we'd all only know for certain if we died. However, I'm certain that whatever is beyond is not this life if anything at all is not like this life and does not have the same sorts of opportunities because it would be a completely different existence. For all I know if there could be an afterlife it could be really shit and there's no going back. Whilst I identify as an agnostic, I am intent on staying in this life because a) I KNOW this life exists and I've no definitive proof of an afterlife and b) there's a ridiculous amount of things in this world that my tragically short lifespan will never let me experience.

I do not accept death as an immutable and changable thing and just because I may entertain a possible notion that perhaps there's something, it doesn't make me support this cause any less. I'm also not having children because I'm fixed.

Edited by Droplet, 09 January 2013 - 07:18 AM.

[Julia36]

Define Death!

[YOLF]

Just skimming but... how do near death experiences and beliefs in an afterlife relate to our kind of immortality? It seems both relate more to accepting death and having children. I don't think this is positive for our topic.

Very interesting and whilst I don't discount an afterlife, it's a shame he isn't putting funding into what we're doing too.

Well all I'm saying is that I do not discount an afterlife and we'd all only know for certain if we died. However, I'm certain that whatever is beyond is not this life if anything at all is not like this life and does not have the same sorts of opportunities because it would be a completely different existence. For all I know if there could be an afterlife it could be really shit and there's no going back. Whilst I identify as an agnostic, I am intent on staying in this life because a) I KNOW this life exists and I've no definitive proof of an afterlife and b) there's a ridiculous amount of things in this world that my tragically short lifespan will never let me experience.

I do not accept death as an immutable and changable thing and just because I may entertain a possible notion that perhaps there's something, it doesn't make me support this cause any less. I'm also not having children because I'm fixed.

Sorry, I'm not really sure why I quoted you, my response was general. I guess I may have just been agreeing. So what prompted you to get fixed w/o kids? Frozen eggs at least? Cryonics?

Edited by cryonicsculture, 09 January 2013 - 03:17 PM.

[Droplet]

Sorry, I'm not really sure why I quoted you, my response was general. I guess I may have just been agreeing. So what prompted you to get fixed w/o kids? Frozen eggs at least? Cryonics?

That's okay. I have no frozen eggs and cannot afford cryonics. My main reason for getting fixed is simply due to not really liking kids and not wanting to bring a life into the world that didn't ask to be born and I will be unable to show love towards. I also didn't have much of a normal childhood myself due to overbearing parents and don't want to waste my meagre life span and healthy time left raising a small human when I can be making up for lost opportunities. I also don't have the best genetics in my family and whilst I've nothing against other people having kids as long as they're loved and cared for, had I been maternal towards children I'd have chosen adoption. There are enough unloved children in homes without me making new.

In the end, I decided to get fixed so that I can really minimise the risk of pregnancy. I'm not against abortion and believe in a woman's right to choose but I don't like the thought of myself having to have one when I could have taken precautions to stop getting pregnant in the first place. I know that there is still a slim chance of some very cruel twist of fate but at least I know in my own mind that I did all I could to prevent having to have a termination.

I find babies cute to look at but have no desire to care for them and find them a burden no matter who's they are. I'm polite to kids but I'm not fond of them. I do however hate cruelty towards children and believe that they have a right to feel loved and safe. Just that I couldn't personally make them feel loved or have the patience/nature to bring them up.

Edited by Droplet, 09 January 2013 - 03:44 PM.

[YOLF]

How old are you (if I may ask). Have you looked at the option of paying for cryonics through life insurance? Depending on your age it could be pretty cheap and the opportunity to make up for lost opportunities in the future will be better than they are now. esp when you have an investment running for decades if not even longer. You could wake up rich

It sounds like you have emotional issues. I would really concentrate on working those out and finding yourself free from the effects of overbearing parents. It will change your life outlook and alot of your opinions when you figure out how you came to be who you are and realize you can determine a much better outcome.

Edit: just added you on skype and saw your age. My life insurance costs as an ex smoker, 2 years older than you will be around 1200 a year for $250K USD or less as I need to go by BMI rather than body weight. This is enough to get preserved through Alcor ($80-200K) or CI ($28K) even in the event of of modest inflation. KrioRus can preserve you for $10K, so you're insurance could be pretty cheap with costs like that considered. You're a woman, you're in a good age bracket, and you're probably not a smoker, so I imagine your insurance would be alot cheaper than mine. You should look into it. If I were to insure for just $50K I'd be looking at $15-25USD a month and that'd get me the standard cryonics preservation. It's the same through CI and KrioRus as it is through Alcor. Who has the best sustainability is still debatable, but I image if one cryonics company goes down or is about to, another will step in or people will raise donations.

Edited by cryonicsculture, 09 January 2013 - 04:15 PM.

[Droplet]

How old are you (if I may ask). Have you looked at the option of paying for cryonics through life insurance? Depending on your age it could be pretty cheap and the opportunity to make up for lost opportunities in the future will be better than they are now. esp when you have an investment running for decades if not even longer. You could wake up rich

It sounds like you have emotional issues. I would really concentrate on working those out and finding yourself free from the effects of overbearing parents. It will change your life outlook and alot of your opinions when you figure out how you came to be who you are and realize you can determine a much better outcome.

I'm coming 30 this year. I couldn't afford any kind of insurance either at this point in time because I'm on minimum wage.

I can't say that I have many issues now, I'm enjoying myself doing what I should have done years ago. I do actually love my parents and whilst I acknowledge that they loved me too much and their reluctance to let me go hasn't actually helped me, I know they meant well. I have spent enough time and money in therapy and I know what I want...I want to enjoy myself as much as possible and live in hope that maybe life extension could come about in my life time. I also make sure that I help this cause as much as I can.

I wouldn't class my inability to love a child as an emotional issue, as it doesn't bother or effect me nor those around me. I see it as no different to people who dislike animals but wouldn't hurt them. I love caring for animals but I have great friends who do not feel that way. I wouldn't class them as having issues because they didn't like the idea of a pet. However if they ran around the neighbourhood abusing pets for kicks I'd class them as disturbed.

[YOLF]

How old are you (if I may ask). Have you looked at the option of paying for cryonics through life insurance? Depending on your age it could be pretty cheap and the opportunity to make up for lost opportunities in the future will be better than they are now. esp when you have an investment running for decades if not even longer. You could wake up rich

It sounds like you have emotional issues. I would really concentrate on working those out and finding yourself free from the effects of overbearing parents. It will change your life outlook and alot of your opinions when you figure out how you came to be who you are and realize you can determine a much better outcome.

I'm coming 30 this year. I couldn't afford any kind of insurance either at this point in time because I'm on minimum wage.

I can't say that I have many issues now, I'm enjoying myself doing what I should have done years ago. I do actually love my parents and whilst I acknowledge that they loved me too much and their reluctance to let me go hasn't actually helped me, I know they meant well. I have spent enough time and money in therapy and I know what I want...I want to enjoy myself as much as possible and live in hope that maybe life extension could come about in my life time. I also make sure that I help this cause as much as I can.

I wouldn't class my inability to love a child as an emotional issue, as it doesn't bother or effect me nor those around me. I see it as no different to people who dislike animals but wouldn't hurt them. I love caring for animals but I have great friends who do not feel that way. I wouldn't class them as having issues because they didn't like the idea of a pet. However if they ran around the neighbourhood abusing pets for kicks I'd class them as disturbed.

I think therapy may have improved your life, but I wouldn't class your outlook as being an acceptable outcome. I would expect better, but I don't think therapy will get you there, According to the internet, minimum wage is 6.08GBP and the average monthly wage is 1244EURO or 1014GBP or 1624USD and assumes a 40 hour week. Is that about right? MW is pretty high in the UK, here is 7.75USD or 4.84 GBP. I know I could pay for my life insurance with 1624 even if I was going for KrioRus and putting some money aside to fly to Russia to die or get shipped there dead. Cryonics companies are popping up everywhere, KrioRus is a newcomer and the Ozzies (is that how they say it?) are getting their own cryonics company. I imagine the UK will have one too or you will be able to get it done on the mainland nearby. Are you living at home?

[Droplet]

I think therapy may have improved your life, but I wouldn't class your outlook as being an acceptable outcome. I would expect better, but I don't think therapy will get you there.

"Acceptable" for whom exactly? Your personal tastes? Society? I get it, you're potentially one of those people who think that having a vagina means that the only life path I should place priority on is breeding. Whilst I know that's popular, it may benefit you to look up the term "childfree" and also to look up whilst there the concept of "early articulator." It may put you in therapy when you realise that there are plenty of other things to do with your life than raise little ones.

As for whether my plans and life are to your liking I couldn't give a hoot. I pay taxes, don't cause any harm and most importantly I'm happy with my decisions.

According to the internet, minimum wage is 6.08GBP and the average monthly wage is 1244EURO or 1014GBP or 1624USD and assumes a 40 hour week. Is that about right? MW is pretty high in the UK, here is 7.75USD or 4.84 GBP. I know I could pay for my life insurance with 1624 even if I was going for KrioRus and putting some money aside to fly to Russia to die or get shipped there dead. Cryonics companies are popping up everywhere, KrioRus is a newcomer and the Ozzies (is that how they say it?) are getting their own cryonics company. I imagine the UK will have one too or you will be able to get it done on the mainland nearby. Are you living at home?

I ain't going into details about my situation on a public forum where any Tom, Dick or Harry can drop by but cryonics isn't even on the list of priorities at the moment. Again, if this doesn't please you, I really don't care because pleasing you isn't going to benefit me. I'm here to help out with the cause as best as I can, not please individuals.

Edited by Droplet, 09 January 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[YOLF]

Sorry, I didn't mean to convey any of that, I feel the same way. I probably won't have kids until after I get thawed out as my income isn't that great either. I don't feel like having kids now, but I recognize that I would if I had enough time and could provide them with at least an upper middle class lifestyle. I figure why have kids now when it will make life harder than it has to be. If I work for a sufficient amount of time, I can retire for 20 years and raise a kid or two. These are the possibilities that cryonics allows for. I wouldn't suggest having kids for anyone if you don't have the money to do it.

I've sent my full response via pm...

oh wow... I seem to have lost a significant bit of text, it may take some time for me to rebuild my thoughts in the pm.

Edited by cryonicsculture, 09 January 2013 - 07:43 PM.

[Droplet]

I wouldn't suggest having kids for anyone if you don't have the money to do it.

It's not just about the money although I do think it's great that you've thought about that side of things. Even the pushing of the idea that everyone who can should have kids I think is something that society shouldn't be forcing onto people. The only people who should have kids are those able to look after them and give them a reasonable quality of life. You could be a millionaire but if you cannot love and care for the children then you really shouldn't be breeding. I can safely say that were I immortal AND rich I'd still never want to raise children because I just don't like them. If I'm honest with myself and everyone else, I just wouldn't want to waste any amount of years on a chore I'd hate raising kids who'd pick this up and resent me.

Edited by Droplet, 09 January 2013 - 09:02 PM.