We, as well as the leaders of transhumanism all over the world, have a challenge to deal with. It is the development of a convincing advertising, agitprop content that attracts attention to our topic. We also must impel people to act in favor of radical life extension. We need video-blogs, scientific and popular science lectures, movies, ads and virus videos. We hardly have anything, and anyway if there’s something then it’s rather low quality.
On the other hand, the problem is that all the movies and presentations demonstrated in different countries did not cause much impact. The number of supporters is growing, but incredibly slow. It may seem that the flow of «natural information» about the scientific progress has to draw an educated listener to a conclusion that radical life extension is possible and that it’s their top priority. However, in reality we observe the unwillingness of people to consider fighting death.
There is a vicious cycle: a large budget is needed to create a good media product, but in order to have a large budget, one needs to have a persuasive media product.
Nevertheless, our task is to create relevant content, even in these straitent circumstances, in order to improve everyone’s and our own chances to survive.
This is where we face an insanely complicated question: why is it, that all the previous activities of many people startign from the end on the 19th century, didn’t lead to success? And another, even more complicated question – how can we finally become persuasive?
Even one argument would be sufficient for us: there’s so little being done for life extension in the whole world, the amount of resources allocated to scientific research is negligible. When we engage in public discussions, we come across an absolutely irrational, controvircial and suicidal position.
Approving of death and reluctance of physical immortality have a complex set of reasons.
Philosophers of the past tried to justify death, seeing its inevetability. It was impossible to realize that умкн single human life collapses, ends with a tragedy. It’s obvious that the very nature of any human being strives towards undying, however, not seeing such a possibility, the humanity lost itself in religious illusions.
People have always died from aging and they are not capable of imagining that things can be different.
Because of that in the cultural context people started to concieve immortality as something bad, even as a punishment.
Also, human mind is set in a way to avoid the terrifying thoughts about death. Therefore, it’s much easier not to think about the inevitable death from aging, than to do something about it.
A person is very much afraid of death «right here, right now», but there’s no genetically coded fear of death in 30-40 years. That’s the reason why the value of an extra long life doesn’t meet the corresponding program of our minds’ activity.
There has always been a dilemma in the propaganda of transhumanism ideas – whether it’s best to tell the people first of all what they can understand and then move gradually from there, or to advocate the concept of a new and beautiful world without death, dealing at the same time with the risk to gain the character of a loony.
In the fisrt case, we are talking about some age-related disease and tell the people that it has its molecular basis, which actually is aging that we need to fight against. In the course of our work we see that this approach gets approval, however it gets no enthusiasm, it doesn’t drive people to any actions at all.
In the second scenario, we have much fewer supporters, but among those there are true enthusiasts, fans, which we ourselves are.
There’s also a question about what audience we are talking to: educated people, ones who already are interested, people with resources, the youth, the elderly, scientists, people who don’t want to die, people who want to look good, self-motivated people, voters, politicians, ones who want to get healed, ones looking for friends and like-minded people, the ambitios, ones who want to make money, ones who want to help people, ones striving towards justice, ones who want to help lots of people, doctors, patients, ones aspiring to gain knowledge, ones looking for social guaranties, middlebrows, heroes, parents, children?
Judging from the knowledge we have, our relatively rich work experience, we believe that first of all we have to focus on people with an active social position, on innovators. In this case, creation of content is the subjust of interaction with a particular person. Meaning that our work must be focused on personal communications, on building a social network, on creating the community, on creating an informal and folmal organisations. The idea, that ok, here we go and tell everyone about scientific news in the area of life extension and show the ways to become immortal, hasn’t worked on its own anywhere in the world. Every time we ahve to see a particular person and envision clearly what exactly we want from them. First of all, we want this person to become the same power engine in the area of transhumanism, as we are ourselves. It’s possible that a couple dozen people in the world will change the situation, more precisely, will accelerate the change. By creating the video content we have to come up with a non-trivial solution that is more likely to achieve the result.