What is your view on Biological Immortality

[Victor Medvil]

There is an entire movement called trans-humanism dedicated to supporting technologies and sciences such as Biotechnology,Nanotechnology, and Robotics to become Physically Immortal and "God-like" on this Earth via technology, I wanted to know Christian views on such a attempt does this conflict with your beliefs, are you against such things?


Here are a few articles about the subject
Link1 = What if aging weren’t inevitable, but a curable disease?
Link2 = Digital immortality: How your life’s data means a version of you could live forever
Link3 = Artificial Human Beings: The Amazing Examples Of Robotic Humanoids And Digital Humans
Link4 = Gene Therapy Is Successfully Treating a Common Form of Inherited Blindness

 

[Sabertooth]

What is your view on Biological Immortality[?]

"(I)t is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,..." Hebrews 9:27 NKJV

 

[Norbert L]

I wanted to know Christian views on such a attempt does this conflict with your beliefs, are you against such things?

It's sort of on one hand this but on the other hand that. The idea to become immortal through technology, the way I see it, approaches the ethics of the historical snake oil salesman. Ain't going to happen and relies on people's fear of death. BUT the endevour to reach that end can benefit mankind by improving our general health through transferable technologies.

 

[Victor Medvil]

It's sort of on one hand this but on the other hand that. The idea to become immortal through technology, the way I see it, approaches the ethics of the historical snake oil salesman. Ain't going to happen and relies on people's fear of death. BUT the endevour to reach that end can benefit mankind by improving our general health through transferable technologies.

The Key to that is they are actually trying to make people live forever, it isn't a long con like the snake oil salesmen tried in the past, but one could argue that the universe will eventually end and nothing can truly be immortal.

 

[Sabertooth]

...it isn't a long con like the snake oil salesmen tried in the past,...

It is a self-con, like the glass barriers experienced with AI & SETI. Or the compulsions of an addicted gambler. "If I can just play one more hand, I just know that I will win...!"

It is a desperate act of [misplaced] faith.

 

[Victor Medvil]

It is a self-con, like the glass barriers experienced with AI & SETI. Or the compulsions of an addicted gambler. "If I can just play one more hand, I just know that I will win...!"

It is a desperate act of [misplaced] faith.

So, then you think it is a impossibility to extend the human lifespan to a longer period of time then now? What about how the human lifespan has already been extended by technology most people didn't live to their 70s to 90s back 1000 years ago. You don't think there will come a time when the human lifespan can be extended indefinitely by some invention of human technology?

 

[Sabertooth]

So then you think it is a impossibility to extend the human lifespan to a longer period of time then now? What about how the human lifespan has already been extended by technology most people didn't live to their 70s to 90s back 1000 years ago. You don't think there will come a time when the human lifespan can be extended indefinitely by some invention?

Yes, I believe that medical science can continue to extend life, but I believe that it is subject to the "law of diminishing returns."

I believe that [true] AI will never come to pass. At best, it will improve human-machine interfaces. (IIRC, A. G. Bell was trying to invent the hearing aid, when he invented the telephone.) So, there is an indirect use for that branch of engineering.

People may still freely pour their money into SETI (if they are so inclined), but I anticipate that no one will ever answer them.

 

[Victor Medvil]

Yes, I believe that medical science can continue to extend life, but I believe that it is subject to the "law of diminishing returns."

I believe that [true] AI will never come to pass. At best, it will improve human-machine interfaces. (IIRC, A. G. Bell was trying to invent the hearing aid, when he invented the telephone.) So, there is an indirect use for that branch of engineering.

People may still freely pour their money into SETI (if they are so inclined), but I anticipate that no one will ever answer them.

Okay, since you brought it up, let's talk about immortality using the Mind Machine Interface, so you don't there will ever come a point where humans can copy over the living mind of a human using one of these devices to a computer? It would seems like a logical step for the technology of Mind Machine Interfaces the transfer of all the data within a human mind to a computer.

 

[Sabertooth]

so you don't there will ever come a point where humans can copy over the living mind of a human using one of these devices to a computer?

Quite possibly, our static memory (a la The Final Cut, 2004), but not our dynamic operating system. It is not material-based. The best you will get is a momentary snapshot. (Video is just a sequence of such snapshots.)

AI, whether developed or transferred, can only happen in a reality where the human will can be reduced to material processes. We do not live in that reality.

 

[Victor Medvil]

Quite possibly, our static memory (a la The Final Cut, 2004), but not our dynamic operating system. It is not material-based. The best you will get is a momentary snapshot. (Video is just a sequence of such snapshots.)

AI, whether developed or transferred, can only happen in a reality where the human will can be reduced to material processes. We do not live in that reality.

What makes you think we don't live in such a reality where the Human mind or "Soul" can be reduced to "physical processes"? I am interested to hear this explaination...

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

I believe that [true] AI will never come to pass.

I believe that lots of experts on the field disagree with you.

 

[Sabertooth]

What makes you think we don't live in such a reality where the Human mind or "Soul" can be reduced to "physical processes"?

Genesis 2:7

Feel free to conduct all of the non-invasive experiments that you care to, but I am certain that they will confirm my position.

 

[Sabertooth]

I believe that lots of experts on the field disagree with you.

So, let them keep trying to bring it about.

 

[Victor Medvil]

I believe that lots of experts on the field disagree with you.

I would tend to agree with this assessment, many experts in the fields of science believe this possible even the foundations for such machines already exists like Watson.

 

[Sabertooth]

...many experts in the fields of science believe this possible even the foundations for such machines already exists like Watson.

Watson is an efficient compendium. That is a function of static memory, but a lot of it. It exhibited no self-will.

Humans are more than that.

 

[Victor Medvil]

Watson is an efficient compendium. That is a function of static memory, but a lot of it. It exhibited no self-will.

Humans are more than that.

I realize it did not exhibit self-awareness but as I said "The Foundations for such machines". It was only a "Narrow A.I." not a "General A.I.", as I said isn't it a logical step for the technology to evolve to have more complexity over time like everything else. We cannot create such machines.... yet.

 

[Sabertooth]

We cannot create such machines.... yet.

The human will transcends "meat" memory.

 

[Victor Medvil]

The human will transcends "meat" memory.

And that is your opinion only time will tell if that is true, I dare to say let's talk again about this in 25 years, until 2045? Thank you for expressing your opinion it has been fun talking with you about this subject Sabertooth.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

So, let them keep trying to bring it about.

They will. It is only question of when and what are humans going to do after it happens.

Covid19 has nothing to this when you consider the global implications.

 

[Sabertooth]

It is only question of when and what are humans going to do after it happens.

...or how many attempts must fail before that paradigm is rejected. Looking at SETI, I would say innumerably (due to their shared aphorism, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence").