-
Saved!All I want is immortality. Is that so much to ask for?
-
Saved!Dr EggnogEditing … Immortality is horrifying unless you can kill yourself. -
Saved!Rich .Editing … I can see the appeal but on the other hand: http://www.cracked.com/article_18708_5-reasons-immortality-would-be-worse-than-death.html -
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Immortality would need to be like a group thing. Would suck being the only immortal. Also, yea. The option to back out. Like, say you fell down a massive hole and couldn't get out. Waiting around in a hole for all eternity would blow. -
Saved!Rich .Editing … I actually think an immortal body without a mind that's adapted to that would be the worst part. Our memories don't have the capacity for infinite experiences.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … My memories don't even have the capacity for my finite experiences.
-
Saved!Dr EggnogEditing … Who the fuck are you guys?
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Every friendship and relationship would eventually feel like a blip within your enormous lifespan and you'd inevitably forget everyone you've ever known and end up trapped under rubble, drifting in space and/or an evolutionary relic.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Might be fun for a while though. Maybe just a couple thousand year lifespan then :p
-
Saved!Dr EggnogEditing … Argh, the Celestia reference is jut too obvious.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Im guessing we've thoroughly ruined the dream of immortality for @Mr. ZAP by now.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Not at all. I was being facetious in the initial post, but it is actually something I fervently want in real life, and I have thought it out quite a lot. Yes, there are some definite caveats, but I think that if you were able to be immortal in a sense of not dying of old age or disease and having an enhanced physiology (I fully support genetic engineering and cybernetics and transhumanism in general) then it would be great. I think this is the case even if other people weren't also immortal (though I would prefer that), because I don't want to be immortal because of other people, but just because I want to be able to do more things, and because I don't want to die (which is actually kind of the main thing. I REALLY don't want to die. Ever.) The way I see things, there are basically an infinite amount of things to experience, some that I have already conceived of, and far more that I haven't yet conceived of, and likewise for things that are currently possible with technological capability and so on. There are so many people to meet, things to do, things to learn, places to go, things to discover, in a literally never-ending, always expanding list. If you take into account the basic nature of what you could do, then there is literally (and I am using that word correctly) no amount of time that would ever be enough to be satisfying, if you always wanted more. So the idea of any finite amount of time to be alive is by its nature just not enough. I am in awe of the vast wonders and complexities of not just our world, which is quite large from our perspective and yet also quite meager, and indeed of our entire universe. I want to meet all of you in person, and have good conversations and relationships with you, not because I met you on some website, but just in principle because you're all people with interesting, amazing lives, and I extend that to everyone on the planet. I want to go to the moon, and Mars, and the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, and out among the stars. I want to learn all of the languages. I want to read all of the books (for the most part), and I want to write many as well. Coupled with that, like I said, I really just don't like death. The other day I said that I was (and am) angry at Pape's death, and this is why. I think death is just the most awful thing that can happen to someone. It's, to some extent, and at the risk of sounding melodramatic, a robbery. It robs one of all of their thoughts, their pasts and memories, and of their agency and of the countless possibilities that could have been in their future. That's why I called it unjust. I personally find that to be a horrifying and infuriating concept to be tethered to, and cannot conceive of any situation where I would rather be dead, no matter how bad by suffering, because at least if I am alive there would remain a chance for future joy, and death would rob me of that chance. Death is something to be avoided, and, not to anthropomophize a biological process, fought at all costs. So I look to medicine and technological advancement on one hand and evolving philosophy and human cooperation on another (to deal with the more unnatural deaths and crises of the world), and ways to conserve or produce more resources, and on an on, to help myself and others so that ultimately we do not have to wither and die, and so that we may better avoid the kinds of tragedies that befell our friend a week ago. That is my greatest desire and focus in life, and really the only indispensable one. -
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Also, on the subject of what a long life would be like vis a vis one's mind and the ability of the mind to cope, the way I see it is this. Let's say I could live another 500 years, or oanother 1,000, or 10,000. First of all,let me be clear that in the grand scheme I consider these amounts to be basically nothing. However, I fully expect my personality and general identity to be vastly different, perhaps unrecognizable, thousands of years from now. Through the natural march of time and the artificial changes to my body and perhaps my brain, I maybe something that could not even be recognizably human, frm a psychological perspective, in today's terms. But frankly I have no problem with this. I have no problem with change. I have no problem with warping, mprphing, gradually over time, into someone or something else. The point is that there would be some continuity, and that I could still do more. Adn let's think farther. Let's think a billion years from now. Once again, in the grand scheme, this is nothing (the point is any finite amount is nothing in relative terms). But let's say I live to be a billion, and have done so much that I could conceivably be said to have done everything, if the universe was static (which it isn't) and my capabilities were increased. Let's say I did everything that could be done. Well, of course factoring in the fact that my consciousness would surely be completely different than it is today, but today I cannot remember all of the details and exploits of what I did in my life, or even literally today. I think an argument could be made that the finite capabilities of the mind and of memory would actually work in an immortal person's favor, even if their capabilities were more than our own. It would not be "I have done and seen everything and it is all old and boring." It would be "I may have done all of those things, but I cannot remember them all, and doing them again over time is able to be fresh," and that would be exacerbated by doing them with a changing mind over time. This is all moot anyway, because I don't think we can ever run out of things to do. So basically psychologically I am perfectly happy and satisfied with the concept of just being different over time. That experience is not something to be shunned, but to be looked forward to, and to be accepted naturally as it inevitably occurs. This also holds true for relationships, by the way. Say I met the love of my life tomorrow. Well, in my view, if I had my way with living in therms I'm talking about, well, we might be together until one of us dies, whether through an accident or illness, but I think it's more likely that after some time we'd just drift apart. The longest relationships in the world push sixty, seventy years, maybe. Maybe a few are a bit longer. To just get to 500, which is nothing, is still blowing that out of the water. If we're both changing over all that time, maybe we'd just drift apart, and this is fine. In fact I would expect it to eventually happen. And let's say those 500 years were magical. But in 1 million years, how well will I remember those first 500? I might have some memories of that time, certainly, some emotional lingerings, but it's also possible that this person will just be mostly forgotten. And this is fine. I could have thousands, millions of such relationships and they would all be great and valid and important. And if I met that first person again, maybe I wouldn't remember them. Maybe we would hit it off (if such a concept was even still applicable) and got together again, and maybe neither of us would realize that it wasn't the first time! I smile and laugh when I think of this quirk of time and memory, and think it would be funny and yet also heartwarming. It's just that when you get to thinking in these kinds of lengths of time, everything we think of as the norm today is just thrown out. It all changes. Our lives would be different, and yet also wonderful, and I think that that is an amazing thing. I think that we should embrace that, as a society, and work towards it together, and I think if we had some sort of combined concerted effort, a lot of these things wuld seem much more plausible, and could come about much more quickly than we would expect, and while we would certainly have some kinks to work out because of psychology and ou current paradigm, it would ultmately be for the better.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Anyway, sorry for the long, mostly unbroken posts. I thought it was important to respond to all of you, here, and I thought it may shed some light on some things about me, and how I see things. This desire and philosophy of mine is, when one gets down to it, really the main core of my identity. Like I said, it is the only indispensable thing, in the end. I also always feel a little bit defensive when people dismiss or look down upon the idea of being immortal or just trying to live as long as possible, because I think it misses a lot of things. It's caught in a kind of "current world" thinking, and I feel it's kind of outmoded and impractical, and I'm kind of in a "new paradigm" way of thinking, in some ways, that I would love for others to also consider.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … *scrooooooooolls* Yea, I think I'll wait till I am at my computer before I read this :p Liable to walk into something reading on my phone. I WILL read it though!
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Don't get me wrong, the limits of the human lifespan within the vastness of potential human experiences might be the status quo but I don't think we should accept that status quo as desirable. The finality of death and hard truth that there's no evidence of any afterlife is depressing to think about.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … On the other hand though, immortality is potentially a worse fate than death if there's no escape from suffering or if whatever transhuman advancement brings immortality doesn't also bring the ability to hold onto sanity, identity and memory over centuries and millennia. Scientific advancements which extend the human lifespan and limit the deterioration that comes with aging would be wonderful but I certainly wouldn't want to be immortal alone, forget my beginnings and loved ones and have my identity alter so much over centuries that I wouldn't be me any more.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Also if we discover how to extend the human lifespan indefinitely before we perfect space travel and terraforming then the world's going to end up with a serious overpopulation problem. Or alternatively, immortality is only available to a powerful elite and we end up with two tiers of human existence and the morality of that's definitely disturbing.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Well I read it! :P And yes, I still agree that immortality sounds most splendid indeed. However, as your second comment hints at, it would still be ideal to have all of us immortal. That has always been the way I'd want it. Although I'd ideally like to be impervious to inury as well. With death and injury removed, people might finally have to learn to resolve their differences once violence is out of the picture. I agree that people are rather dismissive of the idea of immortality, but without life, there isn't anything (in my belief). Seems kind of pointless.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Richard, you're absolutely right that if any kind of mass immortality (or life extension, as is the more technologically feasible and discussed concept today) became possible today vast societal changes would need to occur to accommodate it, in terms of resource management and behavior. There would be huge challenges, and overpopulation as you suggested is one of them. Well, first let me posit that any such technology would presumably be a voluntary, opt-in kind of thing, so the strain of added lives would be lessened somewhat, though not very significantly if enough people are opting in. But what about food? Well, my answer is we are already developing newer and better ways of producing mass amounts of food with with fewer resources, and this is expected to continue over time, and I expect this to develop naturally alongside anything. We also have to consider decreasing birthrates in developed nations that will lessen the load. None of these things are really enough, but we could also try to limit births artificially like China has done. Now, I think the one child policy as it was practiced was extremely problematic, but if we could develop a mkore ethical and practical way of enacting limits this could help greatly in the short run. In the long run, I think it may matter less. But all of this is a bit moot because I don't expect an immortality pill or therapy or whatever. I expect us to gradually eliminate diseases and increase life expectancy over time, and to figure out different aspects of aging and learn how to stop and mitigate them. The reason why it's generally called life extension in the scientific community is because that's what it really is. Literal immortality in the sense of "I live forever and cannot die" is magic; it's not something we can really do. What we can do is eliminate causes of aging and death, and also work to make ourselves safer and generally more protected from unnatural deaths, and never fully be free from the possibility of accidents, but be able to largely take most or all natural causes of death off the table, among other things. Even with this, we will presumably eventually need to leave this planet, and probably sooner rather than later (I would argue that it is pragmatic for our species to eventually colonize other planets and moons regardless of immortality because it increases our survivability, but that's another matter). This would eventually require more investment and advancement in things like resource extraction in space, newer more efficient energy sources, and in the long-run deep space traveling technology, but that is a problem we don't necessarily have to worry about right now. The point I really want to emphasize, though, is I think that we are perfectly capable of all of this, technologically, as a species. I'm actually quite confident that humanity will achieve either one of two outcomes. 1. We kill ourselves off or are wiped out in some cataclysmic catastrophe e.g. asteroid strike or supervolcano eruption or 2. We eventually succeed in moving forward and going out to the stars. I don't see us just stagnating and continuing as we are., because we can't stop technological advancement. It's coming, and we'll get there. So in some sense we just have to keep working and avoid a failure scenario (and this does worry me; I'm as worried as the next person when my new president-elect doesn't seem to grasp MAD or proliferation, for the most obvious example). Ultimately, though, I think that given proper time and resources, humanity adapts, especially if we're proactive about it. The final thing I want to mention to you, quickly, on your other point, is that like I said I unlike you simply have no fear or worry about changing over time or losing loved ones; all I really care about in that regard is continuity and lack of an end. If you disagree or find that unappealing, well, that's your prerogative, and frankly I understand why people can find that to be so. We simply have different priorities. However I think that those issues could be dealt with.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … One more thing regarding your worry about the possibility of "haves" and "have nots" as it were regarding such technology, I'm not really worried about that either, at least not in the long run. Why? Quite simply, technology has a habit of becoming more widely available over time, and of becoming more appealing to the masses over time. As it develops further, I expect any such technology to become more ubiquitous, and cheaper. I think it would be advantageous even, from the perspective of a producer of such technology. It could be some luxury, but this is something that anyone could appreciate and benefit from, and if you just want to talk about markets well there would, I expect, be a quickly expanding one that people would want to take advantage of. So while it might be expensive in the beginning, and also for that matter perhaps more risky, it would not remain so as it became more ingrained in society.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Silent, a couple of things, 1. I used to want to be impervious, and it still sounds appealing at a glance, but two things. First, though we can try to enhance toughness or durability, literal invulnerability is simply impossible, so we must take that into account. Second, at least for now and for the foreseeable future, many of our organic processes that we do currently rely on are dependent on being affected by the outside world, and even by being able to be damaged in some respect. Think of muscle build-up, for the obvious example. In the long-term this might matter less. I would say, though, that I think more important things to aim for would be greater tolerances for extreme conditions. To be able to survive on less food or water, to be able to survive in extreme climates, or pressures, or in vacuums, or to not need as much oxygen; basically, to be able to be less reliant on the things that we currently need to survive, to have more freedom in that way.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … As for the whole deal with "immortality with other people" ultimately yes I agree that my ideal would be that in the long-run EVERYONE would want this and would be on board. Part of this is selfish on my part; I just want to be able to be with other people. The other part is that to me, and obviously this is based on my own subjective ideals and feelings and you can take or leave it, I really think that this is something that people should be on board for because death is SO AWFUL, and the possibilities of living longer are so tantalizing and, to me, obvious. I think that on an individual decision-making basis, based on my own beliefs about what death is (oblivion) and what life/consciousness/sapience is (agency, possibility) it is in your best interest to go along with this, if there is anything else in your life that you have yet to do that you want to do. Of course you can reject my beliefs or ideals or priorities for yourself or generally.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Yea, I always make the reference to muscle-building when this topic comes up :p. But then as you say, this is all make-believe anyway. I've always liked the idea of becoming pure consciousness too. That would be good :)
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Oh, I HATE that idea. It's definitely bias, but I really just want to interact with and live in the material world. The concept of "brain uploading" or whatever sounds terrible for me. VR that you can go in and out of is one thing; the Matrix or being a brain in a jar is another.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … My point though is I clearly am not talking about most of this in a make-believe way. Yeah, I'm willing to fantasize and conceptualize an ideal scenario, but I really do want to avoid dying, and I do try to think carefully and realistically about it. If it's not something I consider realistic like actual fantasy immortality or invulnerability I say so and make clear it's not really what I'm aiming for.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I enjoy thinking about things. To me, doing things and daydreaming are equally valid ways to spend time.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … I love (an am amused by) the fact that this conversation came about on the gift wishlist page of all things with a post based on a desire that, while sincere, was clearly said in a joking manner.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … I agree, but why limit yourself to only one? I also think that doing things helps spur thoughts in a lot of ways, and it's also just fun and exciting.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … If I had to chose, then yes ideally I would want to do both. Hence why I want an impervious, immortal body. Especially if it was super strong. Basically I want to have superpowers :p
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … I mean, if you look at my Superpowers list in the context of this conversation, it's extremely obvious why I went with nearly everything on that list.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I think we actually had a conversation about that a while back when I referred to my reasons for my choices in that list.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Well, I cannot remember that at all, so, sorry I guess? ^^
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I need no apologies for not remembering things :p It is my greatest flaw after all
-
Deleted!
