Editor's Blog
January 21, 2010
A MEDITATION ON THE WILL TO BECOME IMMORTAL… a love letter to science and philosophy that explores the idea of engineered radical life extension and biological immortality featuring Ray Kurzweil…
Sign up for the Humanity+ newsletter:
60 Comments
This is amazing and frightening to me all at the same time. I’m young, and my personal philosophy is contradictory and amorphous as of now, but I feel saddened to think of us as a species losing our “humanness.” I guess this is just another step in the evolutionary ladder? I suppose its not too far fetched when thinking of it in evolutionary terms. I admit my thoughts are riddled with doomsday depictions of such a thing (Terminator, etc). I’m excited to learn more about this!
Immortality means everything, their is no point to life if it will be taken away and lost.
Mortality means everything, there is no point to life if it does not constitute death.
Whether christian or a believer in the immortalist through science, one thing is true: you all search for immortality through your own methods.
Let’s stop the immature ‘my-god-is-bigger-than-your-god’ argument and discuss the philosophical pros and cons of longer life… does it essentially answer any questions on life? Does living longer benefit us?
If people live longer, will that benefit our earth?
Will our art and science benefit from people living longer?
Will I benefit from YOU living longer?
So let’;s step away from should we do and ask why should we do it. And no, ‘just because we can’ sucks as an answer.
I don’t want to die. I want to live for as long as possible. What more reason do I need to do everything possible to extend my life?
Certainly some people don’t want to live forever. If any person wants to die, FINE. Let them. Just don’t try to force me to die with them. Perhaps someday I will also want to reach an ending, but the dream of indefinite life extension is to let me CHOOSE when I want to die.
And yes, we’ll all benefit from others living longer. Who wouldn’t want their friends to live longer along with them?
Science will definitely benefit. Think of all the time “wasted” teaching new people about various scientific fields. If we didn’t need to do that, how many more discoveries could we make?
All this about “we can’t feed the people we have” is BS. How much food do you waste per month? I know I throw out tons without a second thought. There has been more than enough food produced in the US alone to feed the entire world since about 1960. The ONLY reason that people starve in any country is because of governments. People are very very good at feeding themselves, unless someone with a gun stops the food from getting to them.
Finally, WTF do you mean “is it good for the earth”? This is a meaningless question. If you’re talking about the environment, we have the technology to dispose of all human waste in an ecologically neutral way many times over. Even if we didn’t, I don’t think it’s right to tell people they have to DIE just so there can be an extra tree somewhere.
There isnt a problem with trying to expand life, however, it would be more wise to try and expand the knowledge of the life we have in a more urent matter, as time has proven over and over again it isnt the time that you have that is valued when your gone, its what you do with the time. Whats the point of living 200 years, if you only do one year worth of positive change, or just being alive for centuries only to never make a change. I have my own solution, how about we find a way to expand life on a rewards based term. Such as all the individuals who make a significant change to world that we know, get a extra 20 years of life to make another significant impact. why just life for no reason when eternal peace only resides in death. Pushing the envolpe scientific is great, but when we start to mismanged the envolope things start to go bonkers. First we learn how genetics work, then we use this imformation to clone and reproduce at an alarmig rate, artificial animals, and vegetables. First we learn how to make fire, then comes gun powder, bombs and war. Theres never anything wrong with pushing the envelope as long as its done responsibly. To allow people to live centuries fue to new technolgy would eb a horrible mistake, because for every JFK, or Obama, there will be a Hitler, or a Staling who lives centuries on in. Sometimes, certain things and certain people are only good in moderation, if any good at all. Would i love to live to see my great great great great great great great great grandkids? Sure, but then again id have to live through each of those generations, and unless scientist find the fountain of youth to stop me from wrinkling along the way, i jsut couldnt come to stomach myself being 400 years old with skin hanging from my flesh and bones. The ironic thing is im a firm believer in god, and the power of intelligent design, but even with that element removed from the equation, i still dont see where this helps us as a global community, i dont see where we progress, rather then jsut becoming overcrowded and subjected to famine and droughts. The world works in its own unique way and as we all can see everytime we try to improve on it throught techonlogy, it comes back to haunt us. Sure we dont have to walk anymore, and we have cars but at what price? Were cars that amazing of an idea now opposed to the time when the Ford T Model had no competion, till now where there are an assortment of options,and a hole in our atmosphere. I may be wrong but i think we should allow technology to grow at its own pace…..we will see the outcome.
Immortality would be nice, but realistically it seems that the consequences outweigh the benefits. Overpoplution would take into effect and with the increasing number of humans, where will we all go? what will happen to privacy? I am not religious but I do see the harm in wanting to live forever. Greed was the first thing that came to mind when watching this video. It seems selfish to want to keep taking from our earth past our life expectancy. What will be left of our planet if we build and build. People will be forced to live near/in dangerous areas suchs as flood plains, near active volcanoes, and premature slopes that could potential cause landslides. The more people there will be, the more houses, shops, parking spaces, etc. we will need. Mother earth will not look the same or be the same. Also, I would not want to live longer if the aging process was still the same. Yes you have your life but you would also have old age and the aches and pains that are associated with getting older. I believe there are some things that should just not be tampered with. If immortality is actually becoming a possibility, someone did not do a good enough technology risk assesment.
I completely agree with everything you have said. Immortality can only create larger issues for our society. If we already can’t handle the amount of people on the earth as is, why make it worse by allowing people to live forever. We would never be able to provide for people if this started happening. I believe the circle of life is the way it is for a reason, you are born to live a life then you die. While these immortalists believe it is cruel to take away life from someone I believe it is cruel to make someone live for so long with the same kinds of aging affects. When many people die it is because their body cannot handle the life it is living, if you have a disease you do not want to live in so much pain for so long. Maybe the aging process would be better but i find it hard to believe there will ever come a time where everyone is in their 20′s and extremely fit. I also agree with you on the greed factor. Why take more than you need? Or more than was intended to be offered to you? Life is a precious gift that we should embrace and be thankful for everyday, we should not be wasting our lifetime trying to figure out how to make it longer, we should be trying to figure out how to make it better.
It never fails to amaze me how many short sighted, misinformed, pseudo-religious arguments come up when the prospect of the elimination of aging, death from any cause but misadventure, and a life potentially measured in centuries is discussed.
First, you seem to have fallen for the same old propaganda about overpopulation. Hank Hyena answered that quite throughly here: http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/politics/breed-or-not-breed. Population is not an issue. Growth is already falling off, and as more countries modernize, our population will stabilize somewhere between 8 to 10 billion.
Second you have also failed to take into account the advances in technology that are ongoing, many of which involve massively improved resource availability and resource recycling. Between new breakthroughs in Molecular Manufacturing, Print manufacturing, and developing technologies such as in vitro meat, we are rapidly approaching the day when we can easily support 30 billion people on this planet with minimal environmental impact.
Third, you have failed to follow the actual medical progress being made in longevity, or you would be aware that it is research to end AGING, both by preventing the damage aging causes, and by restoring those who have suffered age related deterioration.
All of your objections reveal a profound lack of actual knowledge in all of the areas in which you have raised concern.
I highly recommend you read The Scientific Conquest of Death, released by the Immortality Institute. It can be found here: http://www.imminst.org/SCOD.pdf
Overall I thought that the video was really interesting and thought out. However, I do see some problems with the idea or possibility of immorality. Firstly, I do that our earth was made for everyone in our population to live an infinite amount of time. Resources will begin to dissipate and could cause major issues. Yes our scientific world is becoming more and more technologically advanced and can probably create solutions to some of these problems but eventually the overpopulation will have its effect on our earth. Secondly, I think that saying that immortality will happen within our lifetime is a stretch. I think that it is amazing that they have come so far but I honestly believe that they need to way out more of the risks that can be associated with this large step in our society. Also not everyone wants to live forever, I do not believe that however we were made that we were meant to live an immortal life. I think that they need to do more research and planning and risks assessments before stating that this could happen so soon.
I honestly don’t think immortality is possible at all. The science we have now is incapable of creating the genes they were talking about that prevents your body from aging. I don’t think such technology or science advancement is going to happen in the near future. If in a million years scientists are capable of creating something like that, it still won’t result in immortality. People don’t just die of old age, they die in car accidents, fires, ships sinking, plane crashes, gang crimes, there are definitely more ways to die than old age.
On the other hand, who really wants to live forever? If life wasn’t short, there wouldn’t be much reason to get up and enjoy it now. I disagree with the video, death does define life. People live their lives to the fullest because they know it will end someday, so might as well make the best of it now. Also, living forever and watching the world change in front of your eyes have having to live a different life style than the one you grew up with doesn’t sound too appealing… not to me anyways.
Of course this stuff is possible. To be clear, a term more accurate than “immortality” is indefinite life extension. We can definitely have indefinite life extension, with out a doubt. Science can treat and cure many diseases. Many of those diseases are a lot like the 7 forms of damage that cause our cells to age us to death. A mechanic that can fix a boat motor can fix a car motor. Its really as simple as that. The movement for indefinite life extension just needs the support to get there sooner than later now. This reminds me of the Fable of the Dragon Tyrant, if any of you have read that.
http://www.nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html
A good read.
You really have to listen to the reasoning here – it’s scary and different therefore we shouldn’t do it because somehow, things must remain as they were before and if they don’t then all manner of additional scary things will happen and we should all live in mortal fear of scary things.
RIDICULOUS. Cowards!
The reality is that this technology isn’t just coming, it’s already emerging. There is NOTHING anyone can do to stop it. All you can do is decide for yourself that you will not enjoy it. And please, yes, help us purge the gene pool of this stupidity, this cowardice, the vast ignorance out there that serves to disguise magical superstition under the guise of so many different “reasons” in an attempt to confuse. DO AVAIL yourselves of the choice NOT to participate.
For myself, I will not only help fund it, I will be a happy customer. I will rise to the challenge and educate everyone around me. And if this conversation feels like a kick in the teeth to you or a slap in the face, let me AGAIN encourage you: DO NOT participate.
It’s only a matter of time before I’m rid of all this crap.
It’s only a matter of time before I’m surrounded by the next generation humans, actual transhumanists and the true heirs of our actual heritage, one of exploration, refinement, COURAGE and education.
And only because I like to encourage it where ever I go, please use your ability to choose: DO NOT participate. Die off like the useless spawn you have always been.
Current quantum theory and contemporary research into global consciousness and NDEs along with Stuart Hammerhoff’s study of cell microtubials suggest to me that our consciousness, mind, soul, spirit; whatever you want to call it, does not fade away or disappear when we “die”. Extended life in this dimension or realm of reality is fine. I’m all for it, but it seems fairly clear to me that many in the film and who have posted here see life on Earth as the only level of existence. If I believed that, I would be scurrying as well to figure out the aging problem. Since I choose to believe the voluminous data that suggests that our existence continues after earthly death, I’m not as worried as some about “dying”. As a matter of fact, when my life (extended or not) is drawing to a close, I will look forward to experiencing the freedom that many claim and science supports as an existence unfettered by the worry, anxiety, and physical limitations of our terrestrial vessels.
Wonderful description about death and its philosophy. Great job done Jason. “We can only Engineer our death not pray for it”, i like this. Its talking about spiritual power when a human is dead . I can’t say when will i die but i can enjoy my life to the fullest until my death.
The aspiration to become immortal is the epitome of narcissism. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that you matter enough to exist until the end of time. Even the impact of the most well known individuals is so insignificant in the scope of the entire universe. I am one of billions of people, living on one of billions of planets, in one of billions of solar systems, existing in one of billions of galaxies. Does this make me a pessimistic person? No. The beauty of life is that some day, after I die, I will decay into the earth. As my body decomposes I become soil. When the human race dies, my descendants will be soil. When the sun dies and envelopes earth, our molecules will still exist in our tomb – the dead sun. The only thing that matters in the end is that we are made up molecules that will never cease to exist. Don’t let the fact that some biological/chemical/electrical processes allow cognition fool you into thinking you are more important than any other individual, or any other creature or object for that matter. Live as long as you want if you desire – but know that even if you outlive me, I still exist. I’m the soil our descendants walk on, and I’m eventually part of the white dwarf that exists in the sky. Does it scare you to think that no matter how successful your life is, we’re all equals in the end?
This is a wonderful piece on the philosophy of life and death. One quote that really stuck to me and was very meaningful was, “it is life that gives meaning to life.” the time line from birth to death is our own adventure/destiny. people have choices all throughout life, and it is these choices that create who we are. life is a gift/ privilege that is taken for granted because it is in our nature to. there is no point to dwell about the meaning of life, or when death will strike us. life can be unpredictable. it seems to me that the people who are born with chronic illnesses or develop chronic illnesses later, have a better grasp on living life happily even though they know their fate is death sooner than most peoples. life is a gift from your parents, and it is our responsibility to live it to the fullest and not ruin our bodies or waste away our lives, but just enjoy what you have while you have it without thinking about when its going to end.
LW
I have mixed feelings on this topic; I feel like it could be beneficial but also believe that we’re going against what we were put on earth for. Yes we are here to develop knowledge and experience life, but living forever just doesn’t seem realistic and what God intended. I like his argument about God’s intent and with the medical field battling those challenges, like heart attacks and cancer. While it is true we sometimes go against God’s intent and save lives, living forever doesn’t seem normal. Would we just be eight-years-old forever? Or could we be back in our twenties and thirties? Living forever gives no meaning to life because every day isn’t cherished and appreciated. But the science we develop for this philosophy could save millions of lives like those battling cancer or other terminal diseases, giving them an opportunity to experience a longer life. Having a brother who survived cancer, you realize how precious life is and how easily it can be taken away. It not only affects the person themselves but also those who love them. Giving these kinds of people the opportunity to live longer would be something good out of this step in science.
God has nothing against you living forever, that’s kind of what the entire concept of “Immortality” is about. Nor is DYING a requirement. If you really pay attention to the words of Christ, and actually follow those commands to Love one another, Forgive one another, and above all DO NOT JUDGE, then we would have long ago made the earth into the second kingdom of heaven, just like he promised would happen IF WE FOLLOWED HIS WORDS.
We didn’t, so… we have only ourselves to blame.
I would strongly suggest reading “God Want’s You Dead” http://www.scribd.com/doc/2532766/God-Wants-You-Dead to learn the dangers of allowing people to TELL you what’s in the bible, instead of actually READING IT YOURSELF.
It might help you realize the difference between Jesus’s teachings and the dogma that is taught today.
I am not a very religious person, though I was raised in a christian family so I think I understand your argument somewhat. I also particularly liked the argument about the medical field defying God’s intent by saving lives because for those that believe as my family and so many others do, he definitely makes a point; how is it any different? Now I understand that many would argue that there is a distinct difference between treating and rehabilitating a victim of a heart attack or a stroke and creating an immortal human being, and there is. But would the benefits of this process outweigh the consequences? I feel like the general question of whether or not it is appropriate or moral to go through with this research and its eventual application is groundless, because to me that is a personal decision just the same as the decision to believe in a specific deity over another or not at all. My favorite concept out of the entire video was the idea that “life gives meaning to life” because it sort of parallels my personal belief that all that we really have is the time we spend here on Earth. I don’t believe in Heaven or Hell or reincarnation. I believe in a lifespan that has a definitive beginning and a definitive end. So to me, an extension of the time we have to live would be wonderful. I wholeheartedly agree with your last statement that giving people a chance to live longer would help not only them but their loved ones as well. My grandfather was recently hospitalized with a brain tumor that left him unable to walk. While he retains a positive outlook, the family is terrified. I feel like if we had this option that would make the threat of losing him nonexistent and he agreed to it freely, the benefits of this progression in science and medicine would most definitely outweigh its potential consequences.
What is life without love, compassion, human interaction, or memories- but why do these things mean so much to us? Is it because we know that, one day, it will all come to an end and we will move on to a better place, does the notion of death actually enhance our life? I believe that it does. If we were willing and able to make the human race immortal, would anything in a person’s eternal life mean anything? Or, would human love, compassion, and interaction become so regular and repetitive that it would be reduced to nothing- just another day. Would an immortal person even be able to hold on to meaningful memories for eternity? Does the human brain have the capacity to hold the amount of memories, information, or emotion if immortality becomes the wave of the future? I believe the notion and even fear of death contributes to our quality of life; without death there can be no life.
The argument can be made that technology has allowed us to create a way to enhance and prolong life of those plagued with disease or disability, however; the issues we are finding ‘cures’ for and using gene therapy to repair have not necessarily been around forever. They have sprung up as the world and society has evolved. Death however, is the one thing that has always been present- in every corner of the world, every culture, every person. Death is one thing that unites us all as a planet. I am wary to see what happens to the human race around the world if death is eliminated.
If life does not end with death, where does it end? and is there even a point to living?
As humans, there are many unpredictable factors in our lives. While we live our lives with the uncertainty of the future, death seems to be a constant. We know that from our birth the death clock starts ticking, bringing us closer to our time of departure from this world. “The Immortalists – A Short Film” by Jason Silva ponders about the age old question of immortality. For centuries humans have been on the quest to seek an end to death and suffering and scientists and other professionals are still seeking for this magic solution to solve the problem of death. In these days, with our advance health and technological skills, it is highly likely that radical life extension will be achieved, but the total elimination of death is unlikely. One main question surrounding this topic is: what is the purpose of this immortality on earth? Would this world be such a wonderful place free of pain, suffering, hate, war, famine, and pestilences that one would want to experience it forever? Without the elimination of these negativities from this world, the point of living forever seems more tedious than being joyous and full of pleasure. Living forever also implies aging, so with this theory, will we continue aging forever, or will science allow us to maintain an ideal age? If so, how shall we determine what is the idea age? This immortality will also over populate the world if births are not controlled. On the other hand, if immortality on earth is achieved, it makes new births unnecessary. This eliminates a multitude of opportunities, advancement, and positive/ negative or any kind of drastic impact on the world. Having a population that never dies, will most likely create a plateau in cultural, social, and technological advancement of the world, because there would be no need for any such things after conquering the undefeatable death. While immortality sounds like the perfect utopian plan that would help millions of people with fetal incurable diseases, but it also seems to create a science-lab-test-group society that would need to be controlled by the scientists and/or the government. As a controlled group of people, we would also lose our individuality and our identity as humans. While scientific advancement is necessary for the betterment of life, this theory leaves a lot of questions to be answered and few major adjustments to be made.
“Life gives meaning to live and what we do with life is based on creating knowledge. By knowledge I mean music, art, and science.” This was a quote that suck in my mind as I watched the short film. You are the creator of your future and life can only mean so much to you if you take time to enjoy little things in life like music and art. To think about the philosophy behind this video really gets you to ponder about the future and what it has to offer and yes death is a part of that equation life has created for us. It seems as though science kind of creates an illusion that one day we can be immortal with futuristic advances in research. But what we have to think about is that really what we were put on this earth for? Aren’t 70 or 80 years long enough to live a happy life? I often wonder what it would be like to live past the expected age we are given and how would the earth handle all of the human beings crammed into one place?
While an interesting subject, something inside me just kind of flinches at the thought of immortality. When it was said “Life gives life meaning” nothing in me was convinced; overall people tend to do things because something will come of them not doing it in time, or in missing an opportunity, and if one has forever to do something, an infinate number of tomorrows in which to do something, would it ever really get done? Now, this isn’t a general statement; I’m sure there are people who have passions and could write or paint or study forever happily, but not everyone has that drive to do something for the simple sake of doing it. In this I would be worried that things would set it to a state of static, where everyone just sits and waits, because what else is there to do? It’s one thing to want for more time, no one would turn that down, but forever is a long time, and I would think that it would get a little tedious. One of the great and terrible things about life is that it ends, and that you have to fit so much into so little time. On the other hand is the fact that this only adresses the biological issue of dying, and doesn’t take into account things like accidents or crimes, so while life wouldn’t be guarenteed infinate, I can’t see anyone living like they’re going to die in a car crash tomorrow.
Something that had just sort of occured to me is what would happen to the urge to reproduce if people were able to gain a sort of immortality? Eventually we’d reach carrying capacity (something that could be arguably increased), and in nature when this happens the population will sort of bounce up and down, a lot of times the population decreasing because of quicker spread of disease, etc. As I mentioned above, the video didn’t address much besides simply making sure our bodies could last, but would we be immune to all diseases, or would new ones spring up? And if we were, how would carrying capacity and resources be handled?
The last kind of point I had was, while it may or may not be “God’s will” that we die, the fact is that our bodies are made to die, and do eventually wear out. They argue that if you’re willing to extend your life with things such as medicine, why should this be any different? While I can see they’re argument, using things like medications does alter your body, and can sometimes create new complications (e.g. someone taking a medication for their kidneys, and having a side effect of hearing loss).
To start off, this was a very interesting video. There were some very controversial points made during a few of Jason’s interviews. An example of one would be when they said “people say we shouldn’t interfere with the will of God but they don’t seem to mind when I’m offering them Motrin for their arthritis pain”. I don’t believe we are interfering with the will of God. I think we were put here to discover new things and learn about the earth but not to do it forever. Who really would want to live forever? I mean of course everyone wants to stay as long as they can here on earth to continue their relationships with family and friends but it has to end sometime. These relationships wouldn’t be so special or really mean much if they went on forever. I also believe that there would be many risks involved with immortality. The world would be overpopulated if everyone was to live forever and this would just create chaos. If immortality was introduced to the world what would happen? Would everyone just stay the same age or continue aging? How old is too old? Would people just continue having children overpopulating the earth more? I just think there are too many “What if” questions and too many risks for immortality.
I beleive that everyone in our society can agree that finding a way to become immortal would be an amazing feat. Everybody wishes for more time at some point in their life. However, when does it reach a point when too much time is a bad thing? I beleive that if we were given unlimited time that life would become pointless to us. This quote from the video sums up my point of view on the issue of immortality, “Death gives meaning to life. Life wouldn’t have meaning and time wouldn’t have meaning if it weren’t for the limitation of it due to death.” All the important things like memories, love, and trying to fix our mistakes would become unimportant if there was unlimited time. You wouldn’t need to keep your old memories because you have plenty of time to make new ones. I think that people would stop trying so hard to fix the mistakes in their life because they have all the time in the world and making things right would not be a big issue. To me the point of life is to be grateful for what you have, make things right with the world, and never leave anything unfinished because you never know if there will be a tomorrow. If you were granted a life without end all of the important things that make life worth living would simply vanish.
If humans were meant to be on this planet forever, it would have already happened. I mean, has Lion King taught us nothing? Life is a circle. We are born, we live (have families, make connection to others, contribute to society, etc) and then we die.
Not that the idea of immortality isn’t a good one; think of all the important people in today’s day and age that would be nice to have around for forever. Yet, immortality of the human race would CAUSE more problems than solve them. The human body is designed to stop working correctly and shutting down past a certain age; meaning science would need to figure out a way to stop the aging process all together. Another complication would be over-crowding; the planet’s population is already a problem because people are reproducing faster than they’re dying off. Imagine if there were immortal people running around; the already-present problem would grow worse, leading to space and food competition, meaning nature would just kill people off anyway. Unless science can solve this problem, too, before immortality became a reality, we’d be back at square one, right?
The part when Michael Fossel is talking about how people say “don’t interfere with the will of God”, but happily take medication is just an example of a human contradiction. We are all aware that we have to die; it’s inevitable. However, evolution has ingrained survival of the fittest and self-preservation into our being. If you have an illness, such as arthritis, and you know there is medication to help ‘cure’ that, then of course you’re going to take it. Whether you’re aware of it or not, the mind will work with the body to preserve itself. Similar to when one holds his or her breath for too long: The mind will shut down so you pass out and start breathing again. Self-preservation is one of the most basic of human instinct, no matter how comfortable with the idea of death one is.
One part of the video that really stuck with me was, “Once you reproduce, you’re dead; you’re no longer useful.” This is completely and utterly inaccurate. Yes, the purpose of reproduction is the passing of genes so that the species can survive well after the parenting generation is gone. However, humans are not animals; we are not instinctually programmed to survive on our own. Some species of animals (such as most snakes) lay their eggs, and never see the hatchlings ever again, but the snakes are hatched with survival methods already there. I, personally, have never seen a newborn baby that was able to care for itself. That is why parents have to care for and TEACH their children how to behave and flourish in society. Human parents shape the future by what they pass on to their kids, therefore they have a much greater use than just having a baby.
Immortality has always been a dream of the human race; who wouldn’t want to live forever and see all the changes that will happen to our planet? Of course, with the rate that we’re going at now, I know I wouldn’t want to be one of those people.
No matter how living forever sounds, your body will not take it. For as long as we have been on the earth people have been trying to live forever. There have been myths such as the fountain of youth, where you will live forever, but these are just myths. You body is made of living cells that will die eventually. As your body gets older, the cell reproduction and bodily functions slow down. The idea of treating a condition such as arthritis, is just treating the pain, there is nothing that can treat aging. A good way to think about it is that your heart only has a certain number of beats, and when that number reaches zero, your body will die. Everyone has they’re own personal ideas whether this is moral or ethically correct, and they have the right to voice those opinions. But, each person will eventually be judged for those decisions and will have to answer for them in the end.
I think a large portion of what these people believe is quite idealistic. It’s a fairly simple scientific process to stem the tide of an infection with antibiotics or boost ones immune system with a dose of Tylenol. Comparing those advancements in medical technology to the possibility of halting death is foolish. The moment the genetic makeup of a human is tampered with, that life is no longer what is once was. It becomes artificial. The whole idea is like trying to preserve a beautiful painting by painting over it every year…it makes no sense. The act of preservation ruins what you’re trying to preserve. The only way to extend life is to tamper with genetic material, move around nucleotide bases, and artificially replicated DNA. By the time all this has been done, you will no longer be you. As usual, these people give absolutely no scientific evidence to back up their wild claims; too much philosophy, not enough science. But, as usual, when philosophers start philosophizing about scientific fact, at least we get the entertainment value.
It is an intriguing idea to engineer a solution to death, but I do believe that death is inevitable. Scientist might be able to make us live healthier and longer lives, but I don’t think it is within our reach to live forever. Why would you want to live forever? Life is nothing without death; the importance of life comes from the fact of death. Scientist might be able to add new genes to promote health, but death must come to all life. Alan Harrington stated that “death is an imposition on the human race, and no longer acceptable,” but acceptance is the only venue we have, unless we wanted to life forever, over populating the earth. Today we have medicine to slow down aging or create the appearance of anti-aging, but I do not believe that we can eliminate aging and death altogether. My beliefs have nothing to do with religion, but of nature. Death is part of life, it is a natural cycle that must take place, and by trying to be immortals, you would disrupt nature’s cycle. Alan Harrington also said “having invented the gods, we can turn into them,” this statement might be captivating, but humans created the thoughts of a higher power to deal with life problems, and by eliminating our beliefs we eliminate comfort.
I am sad to say that videos like this make me feel even more like the folks pursuing immortality aren’t considering the implications of either immortality or the singularity.
Consider
- if the goal of a limited-life-span organism is to reproduce, what will the goal of an unlimited-life-span organism.
- Perhaps we live forever but can we stay sane forever? What would it mean to be insane and immortal? (and sorry if I don’t think is merely disorder easily corrected by a dose of chemical – even a poorly programmed computer can be said to be insane, what if the logic of one’s goals, drives and ambitions begins to break down?)
- Would not immortality become an invitation to conservatism in all things? Especially, would anyone skydive if accidental death was the only form of death? Would anyone even walk across the street after a while?
- If the young shake up our world, give us hope and etc., what happens when the old accumulate limitlessly?
- How would jobs, political offices, and social relations work if no ever retired?
The folks advocating immortality clearly imagine a world in which those who gain immortality will constantly grow and gain new heights of understanding. That’s admirable but the average human being today doesn’t have that kind of agenda past thirty. They will want immortality but probably want to live indefinitely more or or less as they are.
Perhaps the super-intelligent computers on the horizon can solve problems like these, since we haven’t. But I suspect that wisdom isn’t a matter of processing power but a matter of the balance between emotional drives. We aren’t going to program this balance point into the new machine if we don’t have it ourselves – instead, we’ll program the machines to satisfy the drives we have at the level we have. Among other abilities we’ll gain, we’ll become *even better* than we are already at getting things that aren’t healthy in the longer run.
And again, perhaps each increase in power will allow us to correct previous short-sighted actions. In twenty years, perhaps we can solve pollution in one fell swoop. But that doesn’t mean that in twenty years we won’t the power to do other short-sighted actions on an even larger scale. It’s a matter of wisdom not power.
One thing I’d say, it’s worth talking about because this coming whether we are ready or not…
Well first you have to put meaning to words… What does immortality means? Is it something that will last forever? As far as I know there is nothing that humans know that last forever, including the universe. Then we must change our definition to something that will live a long time?
So to make a long speech sort I think not one is saying literally forever just a figure of speech at the end something will get you… it is just a matter of time.
However it is also true that to think is long expands of time you have to stop thinking traditionally. Because you focus on biological progress as the main means to improved the state of the world. However that game is long gone… Most of the improvements happens not because we have new biologically superior students but because of the amount of human effort put on things. Science and culture for instance is what seams to be driving human evolution allot more than biology. It is fundamentally changing the way we eat, the way we sleep, the way we compete, the way we have sex, and the way we reward the winners.
If you were going to leave for a very long time first of all you will not be a human, that idea has to die… sorry for the traditionalists. You will just be an entity which in itself has its own system of evolution… like the earth if you like. You will have to keep improving yourself to keep yourself above the water. This means that you will be forever changing and transforming not longer human and not longer threaten by things that we can understand now. Except one thing… money
*Well first you have to put meaning to words… What does immortality means? Is it something that will last forever?*
Well, the conundrums of immortality appear when human beings and things that were once human beings, begin to be able to live a much longer time than time period human evolved in.
Kurzweil’s point that humans extrapolate phenomenon linear while the world changes exponentially is just one example of our natural blindness to different events. Another blindness is quite likely thinking only at the scale of our natural lifespan.
It is certainly true that a being which lives beyond the natural human lifespan would not be human, would have to be “self-engineered”.
What I would offer is that I suspect that the act of self-engineering will involve more than “becoming smarter”. For example, one could engineer a being which is smarter and better at cooperating with other beings OR one could engineer a being which is smarter and better at manipulating, controlling, and dominating other beings. The later option might close off the former option (it’s hard to cooperate with lying manipulator).
Ray Kurweil and other immortalists do indeed talk about the need to understand intelligence and use the progress of simulation technology to aid in that understanding. But rather than looking at only intentions, we have to look at the way things are going. Our *understanding* of the nature of intelligence is pathetic today *in comparison* to our ability to simulate the brain and progress is going in the direction of more powerful simulations, not more understanding. The Blue Brain project is talking about creating working brain-simulation in remarkably few years and then hooking the brain to all the world’s stimulus. So things look like they will actually go in the direction of re-engineering with only a relatively minute level of understanding. There is no reason to think that this will create being more inclined to cooperate with each than human beings are – indeed, considering a large portion of intelligence enhancement is for competitive purposes – better grades, higher profits, more national power etc., it seems plausible that the entire project is moving towards a “psychotic higher intelligence”. Could this be a problem?
It was once said “with great power come great responsibility”. In present explosion of possibilities (and potential power), how does that apply? Well, I already know few people are thinking about this…
This is possibly the most satanic thing I have seen in months, and I have
only been in this site for 2 minutes. Immortality is what Satan promised
Eve in the garden of Eden, the Devil told her that if she ate she would be
like a god. Greed is the only thing I can think of when I think of immortality.
If someone is suffering, let them rest in peace.
By the way here are some prophecies for you(not my own but truth)
there are much more natural disasters to come before the end of days.
especially earthquakes.
I’m no Kurzweil, so I’ll try to answer these questions as I can…
>- if the goal of a limited-life-span organism is to reproduce, what will the goal of an unlimited->life-span organism.
Reproduction as a life goal is outdated and doesn’t mirror the times in which we live anymore. Look at our society: is all based on knowledge and experience, which is exactly what you lose when someone dies. The importance of preserving knowledge has grown more important than the need of creating new lives to span as a race (consider just how the world is overpopulated now). Besides, our first moral imperative should be to preserve the lives of the living ones, since they are the one suffering the pain of getting old, sick and die while the ones who should replace them are not yet there, they don’t suffer because they don’t exist yet. So here’s our goal. Preserving all existing life, experience and knowledge, don’t let everything get forgotten like… “tears in the rain”.
This is not an assumptive, overreaching attitude we have acquired because of the recent advances in genetics. The wish for immortality has always been our most profound goal. What we wish for ourselves the ones we love, the things we like. Think just of all the greek mythology, most of the religions, or even what rational persons think in their innest. In Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” Victor’s relatives tries to give him comfort in front of his mother’s grave saying that death is something that comes for everybody sooner or later.. but he, despise being a scientist, says that death was is not fair, no matter what, and it wasn’t right for her to die, nor for anybody. Death’s rhetoric, all concerned about “leaving our place to the ones that will follow” or about the overpopulation thing, is just a meager consolation we found to relieve our grief, but if we look at this subject with honesty, we should recognize how things really are: not to die is our first right and duty.
Worried about overpopulation? I’m amazed at how overcomplicated many persons make this issue while it’s actually quite simple. The question is: do you want to preserve yourself as a whole or just your genes? You choice. People can be offered the possibility to procreate or to be genetically immortal. Actually I don’t think this will be much of a puzzle for anybody.
>- Perhaps we live forever but can we stay sane forever? What would it mean to be insane and >immortal? (and sorry if I don’t think is merely disorder easily corrected by a dose of chemical – >even a poorly programmed computer can be said to be insane, what if the logic of one’s goals, >drives and ambitions begins to break down?)
Extreme long life is going to be achieved through keeping an individual healthy, basically modifying the genes so that you don’t age. Since being young is generally what preserves you from deseases (and getting old is what basically makes you sick) I suppose that the answer to this question is an implicit “yes”.
>- Would not immortality become an invitation to conservatism in all things? Especially, would >anyone skydive if accidental death was the only form of death? Would anyone even walk across >the street after a while?
I suppose that knowledge to make us immortal and to repair the damage of such incidents will grow accordingly. So, even in a immortality’s prospect, we’ll be enough self-confident to keep living our lives.
> If the young shake up our world, give us hope and etc., what happens when the old accumulate > limitlessly?
I don’t think you get old in mentality just because the time passes. It’s part of the process of getting phisically old and mentally less fit. Think about some really bright scientists: they manage to keep themselves innovative and curious about the world despite of their old age. There are many healthy elderly today saying the feel good, and they don’t feel any different from what they were when they were young. I think that, if we were able to give to the people the chance to stay young unlimitedly, they would mainly acquire the good fruits of age and experience, while shunning the bad ones such as resignation and getting short-sighted, which is, in my opinion, a consequence of seeing yourself getting older.
>- How would jobs, political offices, and social relations work if no ever retired?
We’re going to have more knowledgable and experienced politicians, professionals and artists in general. Have you ever thought something as “it would be so nice to still have Leonardo Da Vinci’s genius, or Mozart’s sensitivity and talent?”
>The folks advocating immortality clearly imagine a world in which those who gain immortality will >constantly grow and gain new heights of understanding. That’s admirable but the average human >being today doesn’t have that kind of agenda past thirty. They will want immortality but probably >want to live indefinitely more or or less as they are.
This is something more related to our limits as human beings than to the issue of immortality itself. This is why we plan to build artificial intelligences able to help us with the issues we seem not able to work out. Besides, death doesn’t make the goal to build an A.I. any easier.
My 2 cents… (let’s say 4…)
Gianluca
‘Awareness is a taut cord between the heart and the mind’
Just because we can do, does not mean we should do it. Humanity is no longer a child, tinkering with his toys. The ramifications of his creations need to be considered.
‘It’s a matter of wisdom not power’ – you said Joe!
>This is possibly the most satanic thing I have seen in months, and I have
>only been in this site for 2 minutes. Immortality is what Satan promised
>Eve in the garden of Eden, the Devil told her that if she ate she would be
>like a god. Greed is the only thing I can think of when I think of immortality.
>If someone is suffering, let them rest in peace.
Interesting. Do you think as well that we are supposed to take all the deseases that God is sending to us because it is natural for us to get ill? In the XVIII century people would die in the thirties. Do you think we have broken any divine rules now that we live twice as much? Do you think we’re going to break any divine rule if we’re going to live longer in the future? And do you know exactly how long you have to live before it gets immoral? At which age you’re going to break this divine rule and you’d better die instead?
> Immortality is what Satan promised
> Eve in the garden of Eden, the Devil told her that if she ate she would be
> like a god.
Looks like he is going to finally going to deliver.
Your comment is possibly the most retarded thing I’ve ever read, and I have only been on this site for 2 minutes. Go back to sniffing glue.
i do hope that more religious people think as you do.
i want to live in a future where all religious people have succumbed to old age and have died.
“Hail Lucifer!
Dark bringer of light!
Hail Lucifer!
Giver of eternal sight!”
Dissection – God of Forbidden Light
Now the website has something a bit more Satanic!
successful troll is successful, it seems.
I think you should read this:
http://bigthink.com/ideas/19170
Today an earthquake hit China, and I read tons of comments like yours, but these comments are written by people who don’t know much things about life.
If this is satanism for you, then don’t be a part of it. It’s that simple. There is nothing wrong to put efforts to try to live indefinitely, just as you do the same. (I assume that you are a christian). Does it mean that you are greedy too?But your beliefs are based on wish thinking, and efforts of scientists are based on evidence and reality.
Quit talking about snakes and apples. You are a full-blown idiot to bring the bible into this discussion. Seriously, I get my information from more than one book. Everyone prophesies the end of the Earth, stop watching the news and read a book. Or better yet, reject your god and embrace the flying spaghetti monster.
Actually the snake didn’t promise immortality. He promised Eve she would “know of good and evil” and be “like god”.
I disagree with “The truth shall be revealed”, but FYI Genesis 6:3 says that man will not live longer than 120 years.
120 yeard? then we have already proven that to be a lie. Jeanne Calment lived 122+ years and Shigechiyo Izumi lived to almost 121.
SATANIC BULLSHIT
and they are going to hell! JK
and they are going to hell! JK
That has been “proven” wrong in the bible itself,
Noah – 950 years, Sarah – 127 years, Abraham – 175 years, Ishmael – 137 years, Isaac – 180 years… And it was after god said that no one is going to live that long.
But, since this is not about god and bible, I just want to say is that I really believe (trust) that scientists are going to find a way to prolong life. But the difficulty is: How to distinguish a belief in science of the future (which promises unbelievable things) from a religious belief which is based on… wish thinking? Do my wishes to live longer make me believe in longevity while actually it is not based on facts? I have no problems in distinguishing these two things however, but I have difficulties in explaining these things to religious people. (Not because I don’t have arguments, but because of them not accepting them) But, isn’t that the case with the most of scientific facts presented to religious people?
“i do hope that more religious people think as you do.
i want to live in a future where all religious people have succumbed to old age and have died”
- High five! lol
If this is satanism … then sign me up. I love science, and I believe we as humans can overcome anything. … Except maybe an asteroid to the face.
People…
We may well be able to engineer the body to be perpetually self-repairing and “forever young”, although we are still a ways off. However, consider the implications of this. First, I can remember when I was twenty, and am now about twice that age. I have changed so much in those years. How will I be when I am sixty? Eighty? A hundred, two hundred, six hundred… we can talk about how we will react to or deal with indefinite life (I would avoid the term “immortality”) but the journey will be different for each of us. And it is not beyond the realm of possibility that you might get to age two hundred or five hundred and just be sick of it. You won’t know till you are there. Further, no matter how good this technology gets, there will still be accidents, for instance, and the longer you go in life the more times you may be in a scrape, whether a car accident or a spacecraft accident, and roll snake eyes. So I would think about the afterlife carefully no matter how long I thought I was going to live; but I am a Christian. And if you are not, or an atheist, then I guess you are going to sort things out your own way. I don’t see the quest for longer, more vibrant earthly life as inherently in conflict with Christianity, myself.
If and when the technology is created it WILL be set aside for the richest of the world. The only immortals in existence will be those able to afford the health care necessary for the procedure. The rest of the world will have to be content with aging and dying as usual.
I’m sure many in Hollywood especially the really morbid characters into facial reconstructive surgery will jump on the immortal band wagon. There will most likely still be tons of really bad shit going on in the world just like today. But don’t fret because human euthanasia will be a community service and you can check out when you want…easily with a cool carbon monoxide chamber…or a nice chemical death cocktail!
Cheers
I’m amazed at the small-mindedness inherent in these comment sections. If your life is ruled by an imaginary friend, wouldn’t you be better off to go and play with the other kids who are scared of the “devil”?
Please, nutcases, find another playground to piss in.
>If and when the technology is created it WILL be set aside for the richest of the world. The only immortals in existence will be those able to afford the health care necessary for the procedure.
Those countries who would do that will ultimately lost economical competition with those who would give antiageing treatment to everybody. Retirement and age related deceases are overwhelmenly costly in comparison with any kind of medicine.
I believe that the concept of living forever is very unrealistic. The way that they compared treating sickness is a step towards being able to live for eternity, isn’t that good of an analogy. My reasoning for that is because treating a disease is just over coming a virus by taking some sort of antibiotic. However, when you talk about eternal life, that goes into DNA and things inside your body that aren’t suppose to change. I also think that this topic bring up a lot of religious debate, which will cause a halt in research for eternal life. Another point I would like to bring in is that, our race is the most superior on this planet and because of that we don’t have any limits. By that I mean nothing is every good enough, as soon as we advance in a certain field, we find something else that we must solve. There is a lot of unknown outside of this world and if we a society keep pushing the burier of what we are able to create, we might not fully understand the consequences of our outcomes.
Wahhhhh, we’re afraid of change. Wahhhh we’re afraid of the future. Wahhhh we’re too scared of a “guy in the sky” we have no evidence of possibly disapproving of us living longer.
The sheer volume of “I’m Afraid!” in the last half dozen posts is overwhelming.
Get the Facts, People. Read the science, learn about the reality instead of vague suppositions and “things you think your pastor told you.”
http://www.imminst.org/book/
“The mission of the Immortality Institute is to conquer the blight of involuntary death. Some would consider this goal as scientifically impossible. Some would regard it as hubris. Others say: “Don’t mention the ‘D–word’, it will just scare people, and turn them away from the very real possibility that modern science will help us to dramatically extend our healthy life span.” What should we make of this? Is it possible that scientists – or at least humankind – will “conquer the blight of involuntary death?” If so, to what extent will we succeed? What is in fact possible today, and what do the experts predict for the future? Is such a thing as ‘immortality’ feasible? Moreover, is it desirable? What would it mean from a political, social, ethical and religious perspective?”
Face the future unafraid, or fear the future and run away. Which one do you chose?
As Frank Herbert said “Fear is the Mind Killer.” Judging from the comments lately, there are a lot of dead minds out there.
this was very good approach i had a great time on ur site thanks for the good post keep posting…
motorcyclelawyercalifornia.com