By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - [Poll] Biological Immortality - yay or nay?

 

Would you accept immortality?

Hells yes! 88 58.67%
 
No, but I would be fine w... 15 10.00%
 
No, it should be outlawed... 47 31.33%
 
Total:150
SvennoJ said:
LemonSlice said:
Immortality would be fun for a couple of years, then it would get boring. And considering we already live longer than a couple of years, I consider it pointless.

And completely wrong, of course.

What is this boredom you speak of. I haven't been bored since I was a kid. How can anyone be bored in this day and age.
Unless you replace actual boredom with wanting to do something else than what you currently have to do. Immortality would only give you more time to do the things you want.

The system of people ageing, getting worse at their jobs, then being inactive for upto 30 years, having to grow new people for upto 30 years befor becoming productive, how inefficient is that. With biological immortality everyone could work half the time and still be more productive than we are now as a species.

Existential boredom



Around the Network
TravenousMaximus said:
You all need to see this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GcL3a4WK6M

Do not underestimate what humans can achieve. The way we live right now is comparatively primitive to what we've discovered up to this point. Google (the company in which the futurist in the documentary now works for) spent half a billion dollars to acquire DeepMind, a leading AI startup, also created their own company called Calico for the express purpose of solving the "problem of aging," this is pretty serious business.

....also, time travel in theory is possible, but only when travelling forward in time - so no Marty's mom 1955 for you.

When you say "travelling forward in time", do you mean cryogenics, so you can exist as you are today 100 years from now, for example? Just asking since that isn't really "moving" through time. The only way to "move forward" through time would be to go....the negative speed of light? Since the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower time moves, and once you hit C, time moves at 0, and going faster than C would make you go back in time....so the inverse must be true to go forward in time.

But "negative" speed isn't real.

I'm not trying to be confrontational. Just a little thought experiment, per se 



Burek said:
It will never be possible, but if it were, I wouldn't outlaw it, just set a strict set of rules. Like, for every person being immortal, we execute one person per year. That execution would be very expensive and paid by that immortal. This way we could fight overpopulation, while at the same time ensure that only rich people live forever, and the poor wouldn't pollute the Earth.
I believe this is the best solution, and certainly nothing could go wrong with this plan.

Well, this is actually a good idea for a book/movie. You've read it here first, if someone steals this, I'm suing for millions.

This is 95% of the plot of the movie "In Time"



morenoingrato said:

Burek said:
It will never be possible, but if it were, I wouldn't outlaw it, just set a strict set of rules. Like, for every person being immortal, we execute one person per year. That execution would be very expensive and paid by that immortal. This way we could fight overpopulation, while at the same time ensure that only rich people live forever, and the poor wouldn't pollute the Earth.
I believe this is the best solution, and certainly nothing could go wrong with this plan.

Well, this is actually a good idea for a book/movie. You've read it here first, if someone steals this, I'm suing for millions.

This is 95% of the plot of the movie "In Time"

Damn their time travelling capabilities! Serves me right, there goes my retirement money...



phaedruss said:
SvennoJ said:
LemonSlice said:
Immortality would be fun for a couple of years, then it would get boring. And considering we already live longer than a couple of years, I consider it pointless.

And completely wrong, of course.

What is this boredom you speak of. I haven't been bored since I was a kid. How can anyone be bored in this day and age.
Unless you replace actual boredom with wanting to do something else than what you currently have to do. Immortality would only give you more time to do the things you want.

The system of people ageing, getting worse at their jobs, then being inactive for upto 30 years, having to grow new people for upto 30 years befor becoming productive, how inefficient is that. With biological immortality everyone could work half the time and still be more productive than we are now as a species.

Existential boredom

Doesn't existential boredom come from a feeling of life being meaningless, which would be accelerated by the realization that it doesn't matter what you do, you're going to die sooner or later anyway. Seems biological immortality would help with that.



Around the Network
BMaker11 said:
TravenousMaximus said:
You all need to see this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GcL3a4WK6M

Do not underestimate what humans can achieve. The way we live right now is comparatively primitive to what we've discovered up to this point. Google (the company in which the futurist in the documentary now works for) spent half a billion dollars to acquire DeepMind, a leading AI startup, also created their own company called Calico for the express purpose of solving the "problem of aging," this is pretty serious business.

....also, time travel in theory is possible, but only when travelling forward in time - so no Marty's mom 1955 for you.

When you say "travelling forward in time", do you mean cryogenics, so you can exist as you are today 100 years from now, for example? Just asking since that is really "moving" through time. The only way to "move forward" through time would be to go....the negative speed of light? Since the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower time moves, and once you hit C, time moves at 0, and going faster than C would make you go back in time....so the inverse must be true to go forward in time.

But "negative" speed isn't real.

I'm not trying to be confrontational. Just a little thought experiment, per se 



the guy can correct me if he meant otherwise, but this is a relativity issue. he's not talking about actually moving through time negatively, he's talking about moving through time faster than someone else, say people on earth. were he to orbit a supermassive blackhole, this would be achievable. suppose orbiting a supermassive blackhole's time dilation would result in 1 year there = 2 years on earth. So in 100 years, he would have experienced 200 earth years.
Dulfite said:
Well, if this even was a possibility (extreme hypothetical) I would rather die and be with God and Jesus Christ than I would live on this planet for that many years. And I say "that many years" instead of forever because at some point, something Biblical would occur that would end this aspect of my existence and start the greater one. This is obviously my stance, and I don't expect many others here to agree with me.


the irony of this post is truly profound. this individual adds a qualifier to the possibility of biological immortality, while espousing an "option" of "god and jesus". the level of insanity involved in this jump from the actual possible to the metaphysical is incredibly telling.

SvennoJ said:
phaedruss said:
SvennoJ said:
LemonSlice said:
Immortality would be fun for a couple of years, then it would get boring. And considering we already live longer than a couple of years, I consider it pointless.

And completely wrong, of course.

What is this boredom you speak of. I haven't been bored since I was a kid. How can anyone be bored in this day and age.
Unless you replace actual boredom with wanting to do something else than what you currently have to do. Immortality would only give you more time to do the things you want.

The system of people ageing, getting worse at their jobs, then being inactive for upto 30 years, having to grow new people for upto 30 years befor becoming productive, how inefficient is that. With biological immortality everyone could work half the time and still be more productive than we are now as a species.

Existential boredom

Doesn't existential boredom come from a feeling of life being meaningless, which would be accelerated by the realization that it doesn't matter what you do, you're going to die sooner or later anyway. Seems biological immortality would help with that.

Life can be meaningless whether you die or not. Dying soon doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it because all life could be meaningless, there could be just nothingness once existence fades away etc etc



I could see living longer and healthier being a benefit, but infinite life span could retard human development in some ways. To me, the old dying out is often how the zeitgeist changes in a culture. Most people I know above 50 are deeply entrenched in their beliefs and struggle to understand new ways of thinking. It is an interesting question how much immortality or even living to 500 would change the way we perceive ourselves. If anyone has dealt with the generation gap of say a grand parent who comes across as racist or xenophobic, just imagine how odd it would be to talk to ancestors 10 generations removed one way or the other.

I would say not sure humanity is ready for such an advancement yet given our often short sighted views. Maybe others are more optimistic and think if you had to actually worry about 2200 you would live differently and utilize resources and spending habits accordingly.



So......Lord of the Rings elves basically?

I dunno....



YAY

Sure my friends and loved ones would die eventually, but I will endure. Life is precious and to have more is the best gift one can have.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.