Push the picture of cryonics as medical treatment rather than life extension, or at least as life extension rather than immortality.
From the way you describe your parents, and from my experience with family and friends with similar outlooks, my best judgment is that if you do not bring up the matter of religion, they may very well not bring it up either, and if they do it will be more of a musing than an objection - they won't demand anything more than a simple, friendly response such as "well, you will eventually find out about it either way".
They may believe in an afterlife, but they are not looking forward to it - they don't have a clear picture in their mind of frolicking among the clouds or some such. It's a comfort belief that shields them from the idea that the good they [think they] did will not go explicitly rewarded, and/or that their loved ones are gone forever. You would face resistance when trying to convince them to "downgrade" from an afterlife to oblivion, but they will be quite open to an "upgrade".
But that's not to say it will be easy, because persuading them that cryonics is an upgrade will likely be very hard.
I think what you should really prepare for is convincing them that cryonics isn't a scam or a waste of money, and either that it isn't weird/creepy or that they shouldn't care that it is. Going from what little data I have, I would predict that their ingrown beliefs in the importance of being normal, of being proper, is a hundred times stronger than their belief in an afterlife. To counteract this, show them the most ordinary cryonicists you can identify, the ones that are farthest away from show-biz billionaires and ultra-geeks who masturbate to H+; show them the most serious, best-reviewed papers on cryonics you can find (and don't go looking specifically and exclusively for biased pieces, be respectful of their intelligence).
Don't put them in any kind of hurry, encourage them to look up info on their own (yes, this means you will have to play apologist against all the sceptical literature, but it's better than the alternative) and for the love of God don't come off as being nervous or scared about their death: they will instantly assume your judgment is impaired from your worrying, and while they may feel somewhat comforted that you care so much for them, they will become a lot more prone to dismiss everything you said.
You would face resistance when trying to convince them to "downgrade" from an afterlife to oblivion, but they will be quite open to an "upgrade".
It doesn't need to be framed as an upgrade, just a delay. People would want to be resuscitated if they flat-lined, because they prefer living longer to dying right away -- dying is always an option, and lasts forever, so there's no hurry.
dying is always an option
Unless your brainstate has been recorded by somebody who doesn't want you dead.
Alcor provides some essays discussing this, which can be found here. See especially "Why a Religious Person Can Choose Cryonics".
I wrote Signing up your relatives to help cryonicists do exactly that.
Towards the end of the article it says:
Well, you’ve tried all the soft sell approaches. You’ve used all the rational arguments. You’ve pointed out all the simple, easy, straightforward reasons why Pat should choose cryonics. They haven’t worked. It’s time to try something with a bit more punch:
“How would you feel if I put a shotgun in my mouth and blew out my brains?”
“What?”
Pat might well try to evade answering the question. The obvious counter to any attempt at evasion is to simply repeat the question (possibly in shortened form or possibly after acknowledging Pat’s attempted counter but then saying that doesn’t answer the question):
“How would you feel if I put a shotgun in my mouth and blew out my brains?”
It seems unlikely that Pat would feel at all good in response to your hypothetical action, so we can reasonably assume that Pat eventually provides some variant of the following answer:
“Terrible!”
At which point you can say:
“That’s how I feel about what you’re doing. Look, it’s easy for you to say you don’t want cryonics. You won’t have to grieve over your own death – but I will. Remember when died? Remember how you felt? Well, that’s how I’m going to feel if you aren’t cryopreserved. And I’m going to keep grieving for you for the rest of my life. Is that what you want to leave me, a lifetime of grief?”
If Pat has conceded that cryonics has some chance of working you can make an even stronger argument: “Even worse, think about what happens if cryonics is successful and I’m revived and rejuvenated: the rest of my life could be thousands of years or even longer. I’m scared I’ll never stop thinking about you and wishing you were with me, going over this conversation we’re having right now again and again in my mind, and blaming myself for not being more persuasive, for not trying harder, and for eventually giving up.”
The last quote is from Jim Halperin who said "This is the exact argument that finally convinced my dad earlier this year after countless unsuccessful attempts over the previous 15 years.”
Ralph
My intended strategy, for my own parents (who are far more conservative and fundamentalist than yours), is to generate a conflict of beliefs. For instance, we know that fertilized embryos can survive long periods of time frozen. Faced with knowledge, some would have to 1) Give up the belief that unborn embryos have souls, 2) Admit that cryonics can work even if souls exist, or 3) Deny the facts.
(1) implies giving up a cherished anti-abortion stance, which is probably more painful than (2). (3) depends on intellectual honesty, the presentation of sources, etc.
Obviously this won't work for your more liberal parents. (I don't even know that it will work with mine.) However, maybe you can find some other belief to conflict against cryonics? Perhaps they are, in general, humanists, and you can point out the convolutions involved in maintaining pro-death humanism?
but considers an afterlife likely.
If there is an afterlife, they'll spend eternity there after the heat death of the universe, so it doesn't really matter. If there isn't, it will help.
It's essentially like it's that much less likely to work. For example, if you believe that there's a 50% chance of an afterlife, it would be worth 50% as much.
Even the extra thousand years of life that cryonics might give you is nothing compared to the infinity you believe you will eventually spend in heaven. If you believe that God wants you to spend time in the physical universe before joining him, might he not approve of you using science and reason to extend your life so you can better serve him in our material world?
My ex-wife was worried that reanimation would yank my soul from heaven, resulting in a horrific "omg real life is complete hell in comparison" sixth-season-Buffy type of existence. I think I managed to convince her that no all-powerful deity could have his divine plans thwarted by something as puny as human technology.
My ex-wife was worried that reanimation would yank my soul from heaven, resulting in a horrific "omg real life is complete hell in comparison" sixth-season-Buffy type of existence.
Hey, if that's the price one needs to pay to get a musical episode...
Why do christians fear hell so much, any way? Doesn't hell demonstrate that human existence has meaning, even the existence of the damned?
Eternal torture seems pretty unpleasant. I can understand fearing that. As to meaning, I don't know how it is relevant either way, but at the same time, I don't quite understand what people are talking about when they try to say whether or not life has meaning. Tabooing meaning seems to not be possible. Moreover, when one asks them something like "should an intelligent cow be happy that its life has meaning, to provide food for humans" people say that that isn't what they are talking about.
(Assuming that heaven and immaterial souls are real) The possibility of re-animation might mean that you're not really dead yet, and this might trap your soul in your body until you become irreversibly dead. Essentially sentencing you to limbo for the duration of your deep freeze.
Also taken care of by the "an all-powerful god can't be thwarted by my mere technology" argument. Omnipotence is a VERY general counterargument.
I can't figure out what christians believe about god's engineering abilities. Intelligent Design advocates portray god as an inventor and engineer, notably of molecular biology; yet humans have invented things no theist ever thought of attributing to a god, like computers. That probably explains why some christians accuse biotechnologists, but not computer and software engineers, of "playing god."
Would framing the argument as hedging their bets work for your parents? That would be a logical way to go about it, but doing that might bring them to a "Cryogenics is for people who don't believe in God" mindset, which would be pretty bad for convincing them.
Nitpick: "cryogenics" is the study of making things very cold. Last-resort cold preservation of people in hope of future revival is called "cryonics".
o_o
Wow, in all the articles I've read, I never noticed that people were using a different word.
I would be wary of trying this approach. "Hedging your bets" sounds an awful lot like "distrusting God's love," and framing it that way could easily backfire.
First some general remarks and then other issues:
A theist or deist who doesn't believe in an afterlife shouldn't have a problem with cryonics. I've discussed cryonics with people from religions that do believe in it and they generally have negative viewpoints although I've met at least one Orthodox Rabbi who after the discussing the issue with me thought that cryonics was acceptable under halacha (Orthodox Jewish law). He disagreed with an argument I've been throwing around for a while that under halachah cryonics is either forbidden or mandatory (I can expand on the logic for that position and why he disagreed if anyone cares). Among Jews who believe in an afterlife at least there seems to be a larger fraction than among Christians who believe in an afterlife who are ok with cryonics. This is likely centered around how Judaism has been historically more focused on this world than Christianity.
Now, regarding her specific case, if there is an afterlife that is all very nice and good then does she believe that successful cryonic revival will remove her from that afterlife? If not, she has nothing to worry about since the cryonic revival will then only work if there isn't such an afterlife. Similarly, if she thinks that the afterlife is really nice and pleasant, to the point where given the option of cryonic revival and the afterlife she would rather be in the afterlife, why isn't she killing herself now? That sounds offensive, but it is a legitimate issue.
The truth is that for this sort of thing the most likely thing to do work is an emotional appeal. You will take comfort in your parents preservation even if it takes centuries for the process to work. Even if it doesn't end up working, you will get more comfort now. Moreover, if cryonics does work, how much will it stink to go through centuries now without them? Do they want to burden you with that?
Similarly, if she thinks that the afterlife is really nice and pleasant, to the point where given the option of cryonic revival and the afterlife she would rather be in the afterlife, why isn't she killing herself now?
Successful afterlife memes are almost always packaged with a "but if you commit suicide you don't get to go, or go to hell, or won't get into the super VIP section of heaven."
Successful afterlife memes are almost always packaged with a "but if you commit suicide you don't get to go, or go to hell, or won't get into the super VIP section of heaven."
In the case of Christianity, the reason that suicide is a mortal sin is that a Christian in this life is as a soldier on sentry duty, who may not despair, abandon his post, and betray his comrades. Buddhism has a similar concept of the bodhisattva, who chooses to remain in this life to help those who still suffer. For that matter, in war situations, sleeping on guard can get you shot out of hand.
I think you should sign up for cryonics yourself first. Having you as an example may help persuade.
Also, make sure to shoot down any discomfort about "wasting your inheritance". You'd much rather they use their money on this procedure that has an unknown probability of success than any other use. If you have siblings, they might need to be onboard. Some people feel strongly about using their money on themselves. They might not admit to it and still feel that way.
I don't see how an "afterlife" solves anything. If such a state exists, we have no reason to believe that it has to last forever, except through arbitrary doctrine. For all we know, the entities in the afterworld experience existential terror from the knowledge of their eventual oblivion, and they engage in terror management through anxiety buffers like religion, self-esteem and beliefs in their own exceptionalism. As H.L. Mencken asks in his book, "Treatise on the Gods," do ghosts die and become higher-level ghosts?
Even in the christian context, I don't see how "going to heaven" solves anything. What if you get to heaven, then you choose to rebel against god and become alienated from him again? How do you know that can't happen, again apart from arbitrary doctrine? God doesn't have to arrange his creation for your convenience; he doesn't have to love you, give your life meaning and treat you fairly according to your lights. Perhaps god intends to screw you as part of his greater plan, and you just happened to draw the short straw.
I have slowly been trying to convince my father to do this as well. I would love it if you post the arguments you've come up with.
In "Time Enough For Love", Heinlein has Lazarus Long rejecting the idea of using cold sleep to skip forwards a few centuries. He (Long) says that suppose some failsafe goes wrong and he ends up sleeping for the rest of the life of the universe, and then there turns out to be a Rapture after all? There he is, his corpsicle drifting through space not exactly dead and not exactly alive, and maybe he misses out on both reincarnation and being taken up bodily into Heaven.
Another character suggests this isn't his real reason, but for anyone who seriously believes in the possibility of a Second Coming on the same timescale as cryonics, it's something to consider.
It just amuses me to consider the people now in their 80's - Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, Jack Chick, Harold Camping, et al. - who have wasted their lives predicting an imminent rapture. I submit that the actuarial tables have a better chance of predicting their futures than bible prophecy.
Of course, I say the same thing about life-extension obsessives like Ray Kurzweil.
I expect to have a conversation soon with my parents about cryonics. My parents are both professional scientists, but are vaguely religious. They certainly aren't fundamentalists; they are pro-choice, pro-gay rights, think "intelligent design" is nuts, etc. My father is less religious than my mother, the best description I can give is probably Deism. Doesn't believe in miracles, prayer, etc, but considers an afterlife likely. My mother is slightly more religious: in the past, she's prayed for help and things have worked out (positive bias). However, even she is far more skeptical than most theists. I remember one conversation as a kid in which she that she thought Jesus' resurrection was a metaphor. One one occasion, when I was in middle school, I asked her why she believed in God, and she replied that it was the only good explanation she could come up with for why there was good and evil in the world. She once quoted John Lennon, I think, talking about God as simply a personification of Good. She also believes in an afterlife.
Both of them I think would be very reluctant to engage in an open discussion about religion. In addition, both are intelligent enough, and have heard enough arguments, to make it enormously difficult to get them to change their minds, especially since the idea of an afterlife is a comforting thought for their own grandparents.
I would like to, if possible, avoid the discussion of religion, and instead simply persuade them to sign up for cryonics, without trying to force them to give up their belief in an afterlife. I've spent some time thinking about this, and have come up with some arguments. I do not want my parents to die. If there is any way I can be more persuasive, I have to find it, and I have to try it. So I am appealing to the collective brainstorming power of LW. If there is any argument you can think of that I can use, let me know.