On funding:
I'm sure all of us in the community regard the lack of funding in aging as collective irrationality from a population that by and large simply doesn't grasp the magnitude of self-interest there is ensuring SENS is adequately funded. At some point that will change and while it is hard to say with certainty who will be the principle players in 5 or 10 years, SENS could well be at the forefront of development. It's not hard to imagine that when world catches up, which it will, then SENS will be over-funded. So how do we move funds from our over supplied future to our underfunded present?
Well, suppose SENS were to issue bonds or receive loans which would under certain future conditions be repaid. Let's say I lend SENS $5,000 and the promise to repay this money when donations reach $50,000,000 a year or reserves reached some specific level. In addition interest linked to donation size could be offered as well in order to balance risk.
Another approach might be for Aubrey de Grey and SENS to promise to try and raise funds retrospectively to pay off the loans in a future society grateful for the extraordinary work of SENS and the anti-aging visionaries . If there is one guy you'd bet on to campaign to get your money back it would be AdB. (There should at least be the Nobel prize money! ;-))
Even for those of us who have long subscribed to the belief in SENS it is still a struggle to forgo considerable personal utility for some rather imperceivable greater good - donating 5k will very likely be of much lower utility to me than keeping it - the benefit of my donation won't be felt or realised even if it turns out to be crucial. However, with loaned or invested money the utility gap is reduced - I have the benefit of knowing the money will be going to active use for a vital purpose but also a hopeful realisation than a future grateful and a shared-vision society, will compensate for my investment in both their and my well-being.
In addition, I imagine that we feel less concern about a large charitable donation after the fact than we do a priori, in fact we might just feel good. So any reasonable device to encourages us to overcome these barriers should be sought - even if the promise of a possible refund might encourage me to donate, I might not just care about the incentive once I've donated. That is not to encourage deception, of course, but rather an acknowledgement there is more self-interest in donating to charity than is often perceived
Edited by ambivalent, 07 February 2018 - 07:53 PM.
aubrey-grey-2017.jpg 38.6KB
2 downloads
