If you could, would you live forever? - Printable Version +- Eagle Time (https://eagle-time.org) +-- Forum: Archive (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=25) +--- Forum: Chat (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=27) +---- Forum: General Chatter (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=28) +---- Thread: If you could, would you live forever? (/showthread.php?tid=439) |
RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Infrared - 03-25-2013 Not to mention, if humans subsist for several millennia, they will probably keep evolving, while you won't. You'll be a neanderthal living amongst hairless white monkeys with huge brains or something. It's not a matter of "i will probably grow bored of everything" it's inevitable, you will curse your existence. Humans are not physically nor psychologically designed to be immortal. Death is a necessity for any living creature, if it weren't, why would we be here instead of Adam and Eve/Captain Caveman and Son or whatever? The world needs to keep moving forward. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - ICan'tGiveCredit - 03-25-2013 (03-25-2013, 03:44 AM)SeaWyrm Wrote: »Credit, who said anything about giving everyone equal everything? We're discussing immortality, not communism. :P But I was talking about what my organization would do if I was CEO or something. Communism = not gonna happen. We were supposed to solve societal issues, right? So if we solve world hunger, we would have to first give a lot of the money used to buy things we want for the food that poor people need. Also, the father in the story is part of the organization. And Saskamanka would be what I would rename myself to if I become immortal You need money to solve world hunger. And when your "Want" purchases are limited, you're going to steal. Also, I agree with Ed, don't you notice that immortality is only shown in stories and movies? Humans aren't designed to live longer than we have to. Our psyche would break down. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - btp - 03-25-2013 Here's a video that talks briefly about human perception of time and lifespan. Doesn't really answer any questions, but I find it gives some good things to think about. I seem to recall watching a youtube clip talking about the maximum storage size of the human mind, and it's fallibility, but I don't remember where to find it or what it really said. [/irony] I've noticed a lot of talk about immortality being a helping factor in solving societal issues. I'm not sure how this helps? Like, if you suddenly knew you had millennia to live, would that really empower you to cause greater change than you could right now? Would you honestly be more motivated to use your time productively? Or would the time you have become even less valuable to you? And is your lack of immortality really the key reason that you aren't trying to create wide-scale change now? RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Mythee - 03-25-2013 @Coldblooded: YES. THAT STUFF ABOUT 2000 YEAR OLD JERKS. One of the reasons why it would be a bad idea for immortals to try to govern. (03-25-2013, 11:07 AM)btp Wrote: »Like, if you suddenly knew you had millennia to live, would that really empower you to cause greater change than you could right now? Would you honestly be more motivated to use your time productively? Or would the time you have become even less valuable to you? And is your lack of immortality really the key reason that you aren't trying to create wide-scale change now?Good point! I don't think it's necessarily about an increase of productivity per unit of time though, seeing as you have so much more time that even a decrease of unit productivity per time would yield much greater results. Suppose you live your life productively already, the concept of gaining immortality will only seem that much more potent and full of possibility. Plus there would be extra motivation with the whole 'wow I might actually get to live to see my dreams come true in this lifetime?' RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Kíeros - 03-27-2013 So, is this immortal life and immortal youth? If not, then what's the point past ~150-200 years? You're so degraded by then that you cannot do anything. If so, then how do you explain this to everyone? You'll be a specimen, and again, what sort of life is that? RE: If you could, would you live forever? - ICan'tGiveCredit - 03-27-2013 (03-27-2013, 01:43 AM)Kíeros Wrote: »So, is this immortal life and immortal youth? If not, then what's the point past ~150-200 years? You're so degraded by then that you cannot do anything. If so, then how do you explain this to everyone? You'll be a specimen, and again, what sort of life is that? Uhh... I guess we just assumed we wouldn't degrade? But that brings up another form of immortality. I would say No to this one because I don't want to look like Herb who is practically immortalized senile old man in Family Guy. Yeah, it would be nice to keep my looks and be able to DO STUFF. And the experrimental life wouldn't be that great. Sure, they would test nuclear bombs on me, which sounds nice, but it would be pretty boring since I might watch a soap after a long day. And I hate soaps RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Benedict - 03-30-2013 Quote:"...If people were hit on the heads with truncheons once a month, and no one could do anything about it, pretty soon there'd be all sorts of philosophers ... who found all sorts of amazing benefits to being hit on the head with a truncheon once a month. Like, it makes you tougher, or it makes you happier on the days when you're not getting hit with a truncheon. But if you went up to someone who wasn't getting hit, and you asked them if they wanted to start, in exchange for those amazing benefits, they'd say no. And if you didn't have to die, if you came from somewhere that no one had ever even heard of death, and I suggested to you that it would be an amazing wonderful great idea for people to get wrinkled and old and eventually cease to exist, why, you'd have me hauled right off to a lunatic asylum! So why would anyone possibly think any thought so silly as that death is a good thing?"-Harry Potter, kind of. The idea that death is a part of life, that it somehow gives meaning to our accomplishments... it strikes me as the most egregious case of sour grapes in all of human philosophy. I haven't done any dying yet, and I still feel happiness and satisfaction when I accomplish tasks and create things. I certainly don't see how ceasing to exist would somehow increase my satisfaction with anything. Death is kind of like a 0x multiplier to your total utility. You can certainly imagine horrible futures where your immortality has awful consequences, such that 0*x > x, but those consequences aren't an innate problem with life itself. Your achievements are forgotten? Write them down! Your friends and family are getting old and disappearing? Make them immortal, too! Your memory is getting too full and your perception of time is inexplicably distorted? See a neurosurgeon, or something! We have this cool thing called "all of human knowledge and power" that we can use to work on solutions to the problems that might arise for immortal people. The universe has an annoying little quirk in the form of the second law of thermodynamics. Assuming we don't find a way past it, the universe might eventually reach thermal equilibrium, making the continuation of life impossible. The heat death of the universe would suck a lot- and if humanity were to be wiped out by it, or something else before that deadline, I might be like "dang, I wish I could die now, because the most interesting things in the universe are dead and there's literally nothing left for me to do", but that seems super unlikely because humans have done a pretty good job of not being exterminated over the past 300,000 years. Entropy's a bitch, but we might as well fight her tooth and nail for as long as we can. If/when the universe decides I absolutely need to die, I don't plan to fall asleep and welcome it as closure. I'll go to the grave cursing Death's name and kicking myself for my failure to kill him first. haha that was a rant wasn't it; what am i doing up at 4:30 in the morning RE: If you could, would you live forever? - SeaWyrm - 04-01-2013 *high-fives Benedict* I still don't get why everyone is SO SURE that eternal life would mean eternal boredom. I mean, maybe, yeah! I haven't tried it, I don't know - but neither do you! Is it inconceivable that you'd keep changing, keep finding new things to do or see or whatever? Here's a question for all those people who think immortality would be tedious - how long until that happens? How many years WOULD you live, if you had to pick a number right now? RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Mehgamehn - 04-01-2013 I have wonderings about what all you'll end up nostalgic about RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Mythee - 04-02-2013 Benedict, that quote is awesome. I shall treasure it forever. It beautifully expresses my own feelings about those kinds of statements people so often and so casually make. I don't understand the reasoning when people talk about how they'd rather die if x or y applies to their life. Boredom is surely better than not existing. Plus, I'm pretty sure there can't be eternal boredom, since our memory isn't infallible, so old forgotten things to rediscover the joys of will always be abundant! RE: If you could, would you live forever? - 2create - 04-03-2013 I got too many things to say here and too little time to actually say it. But you can count on me to write a constructive post to this thread. For now, simply "yes". The how and why will be posted later, since I need some time to prepare this post. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Epamynondas - 04-03-2013 (04-03-2013, 02:55 PM)2create Wrote: »I got too many things to say here and too little time to actually say it. I think this quote explained why mortality sucks quite neatly already. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - ☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ - 04-03-2013 The history of life has been trying to not die for the longest time. To see a way to not die ever and not taking that opportunity is tremendously disrespectful to everything that's ever lived. You're not accomplishing your hardwired goal to self-perpetuate, and a glitch in the system THAT bad would make me think that perhaps this whole "life" thing was just a grand, but failed, experiment and that we should either scrap it or start over. And then I'd become a supervillain. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - 2create - 04-04-2013 Spoilered for length and to prevent an absurd amount of page-stretching. How did I even find the time? RE: If you could, would you live forever? - MaxieSatan - 04-04-2013 Quote:For a healthy evolving race, the weak must die. That's not happening here, so unless humanity finds a way to discourage the "weaker" to reproduce, WE will be the more intelligent people after, say, five thousand years.That argument really doesn't hold water based on IQ scores of the past several years (IQ is a flawed metric, but the fact that scores are going up certainly implies that things aren't being entirely fucked). Not to mention that morality and knowledge is ever-evolving and the 200-year-old brain you just mentioned will be a lot more resistant to change and gaining new information. Eventually your knowledge and opinions are going to be outdated simply by virtue of the fact that you can't keep up. As for the "follow most developments in society and adjust" thing, most people who are eighty, let alone two hundred, are kind of shitty at that. I do think a fair portion of this community is liberal and open-minded but I feel like it's a lot more complex than you make it out to be. Also that argument's kind of eugenics-y and creepy. (It is total sour-grapes bullshit that death is the only way for life to have meaning though) RE: If you could, would you live forever? - 2create - 04-04-2013 Again, spoilered for page-stretchiness. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Mythee - 04-04-2013 XD Immortal 2create saga. That was indeed a long post! RE: If you could, would you live forever? - 2create - 04-05-2013 RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Granolaman - 04-05-2013 Benedict forgot to mention Harry's argument for infinite boredom as long as we're quoting Methods of Rationality. Quote:"What would you do with eternity, Harry?" Concerning the heat death of the universe: I have no doubt in my mind that if humanity achieved immortality that we'd find a way to prevent, circumvent, or escape our universe's destruction. Humans are resilient and ingenious little bastards and we're already finding ways to distort and bend physical reality to our whim. Given infinite time, 100 monkeys will write Shakespeare and 100 humans will defeat entropy. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Jacquerel - 04-05-2013 Do we need to evolve further, if we are already the dominant species on the planet? There is nothing inherently unhealthy about not evolving, and more evolution does not equate to "smarter people" ! Evolution is purely about survival and we already do that, and much better than basically anything else considering we have healthcare and as a result of our evolution have invented the exact things that you say are preventing our evolution. Many winning evolutionary strategies care very little at all for the organism's well-being or quality of life past that they have kids and "more smartness" is also very far from the only route it takes. Creatures like ants, seals and slugs haven't "failed" evolution because they are less intelligent and control smaller areas of land than we do, arguably you could say that most insects are actually more successful as they vastly outnumber the species of mammals. I think this really stems from a misunderstanding of how the evolution of species works to be honest. It is not a function by which every organism is striving to be supreme masters of the universe, it is merely the natural effect of competing organisms trying to fit better into the situation in which they were placed, and out-breed their opponents. If we've "stopped" evolving (as if we've really been aware of it over a sufficient timescale to tell) then it is because we've finished. Traditional "natural selection" (there's actually nothing natural about just picking people who can't have kids) can't help us any more, because if it could then it would already be happening. Given then that this would have to be a human-driven project rather than one based on our environment (meaning it isn't even evolution in a traditional sense) who arbitrates what are and aren't desirable human characteristics? I can't think I'd really trust anyone at all to do that. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - ICan'tGiveCredit - 04-06-2013 Who says we're not done evolving? And who's to say other animals have failed to evolve? They could be evolving in your living room as we speak Evolution takes millions of years: Who's to say chickens aren't going to evolve into BIGGER chickens within a few million years (granted we don't kill them all off first...) And humans... well if we were done evolving then there really would be no point to reproduction. We would already be "perfect" (we are not, at all) and would have the exact number of humans on the planet. Because seriously, our body would have an internal mechanism telling us how many people the Earth can actually handle. EDIT: Assuming bigger is an evolutionary trait. Just an example. Maybe it isn't good but the gist of it is that chickens want to get better, no? RE: If you could, would you live forever? - SleepingOrange - 04-06-2013 That... Is not even close to an accurate representation of how evolution works. Like, at all. As in, I've heard anti-evolution activists who get the concept better than that. There's no goal to evolution. There's no One Perfect Organism that some sort of quasi-theurgical nature entity set as some kind of finish line for evolution. All evolution is is the inheritance of traits that make an organism more suitable to reproduce in its environment. Humans can be said to be in a low- or no-evolution state because there are few heritable traits that significantly impact the rate and success of human survivability and reproduction given that our society has implemented a number of safeguards to prevent "less fit" members of the species from dying off prematurely. "Not evolving at all" is not particularly accurate because genetic drift and certain heritable diseases are still factors (not too many kids with cystic fibrosis reproduce, for instance), but for the most part they have little effect on our mating selection. The species is always changing, but it will never be perfect, because perfect is a meaningless word in this context. RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Schazer - 04-06-2013 I will rip you a new one later, Credit, when I'm not tired but: as a corollary to slorange changes in a species' genetic makeup from one generation to the next are dictated by the most successful individuals of /that/ species in /that/ particular environment in /that/ particular point in time. Those goalposts are constantly shifting because the environment and what is most successful in it will be constantly changing RE: If you could, would you live forever? - Schazer - 04-06-2013 The argument that "humans stopped evolving" has its merits if you consider the human environment is largely human-engineered, but nope that's also changing over time RE: If you could, would you live forever? - MalkyTop - 04-07-2013 dang this is an instersting topic wowhahh Right okay so it's like prsonally, no, i wouldn't want to be like immortal and shit, even with like eternal youth or whatever, but it's only fro mthe perspective of the me who never has her shit together and already is doing shit with her life so what the shit am i gonna do with an eternal life i mean c'mon. But if I were an actually competant human being and shit, i might actually say yes. 'cause look, yeh, there might be some mental issues. but i doubt they'd last all of forever. Like you're sad 'cause everybody keeps dying around you and you can't make friends and shit? The thing is, the human mind is pretting dang resiliant, like most human beings are able to get over many tragedies in a few months or so, which includes death of a dear one. It doesn't mean that peeps don't care, it just means that people have this ability to move on, generally. I mean c'mon, if we ddn't have this ability i mean what the shit would happen we'd all wallow in our tears because life is pretty goddamn shitty. As for boredom, that thing kinda baffles me 'cause look, there is like a shitton of things we've yet to discover and let's not even get into freaking epxlploration of space how can you get freaking bored when there's so muc hfor humans to do? "But I'm not a sciency person" right okay that's legitimate but listen to this so like what do you think would happen if you gave like a 12th century peasant an iPod, their monds would be totally blown, right? I mean shit it's like magic to them but y'know, it's just that our tech changed and evolved and advanced or whatever verb you wanna use. Now think about what sorta shit the future will make i mean c'mon aren't you freaking curious? well you can't see it UNLESS YOU GOT ETERNAL LIFE, YO. check it. manybe things will be so freaking amazing that we can't even concevive of them right now ic'ause it's so frekaing amazing. I DON'T KNOW! even if you aint a scientist, you'd still be able to see what those scientist types'll make and shit. I'd want eternal life(/youth/biological healthiness/whatever the shit) just to see that alone, see what happens next and what shit we come up with and also maybe aliens. HELL, EVEN MOVIES. OR VIDEO GAMES. I hate feeling like i'm missing outta fun shit WHAT IF I DIE BEFORE THE ULTIMATE VIDEO GAME COMS OUT??!?! i'm reallytired. |