Who Wants to Live Forever?

[muichimotsu]

I had a thread before called "The Desirability of Immortality", though I think this Queen song works much better

The basic question is this: do you want to live forever and if so, why? Make an effort to defend the position of immortality as something we as humans desire and/or should desire. Ethics are of particular import here, not to mention aesthetics, metaphysics and epistemology to a certain extent.

I would argue that immortality is probably the worst curse one could wish on a person, since there is no real sense of progress, time, etc. I would sooner wish to be reborn/reincarnated, if there was no option for nonexistence, than to live forever, either as a disembodied spirit, or in some immortal body.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

I wouldn't want to live forever, because I do not believe in an afterlife, I place great value on this one and only life, I think if I was immortal that would take a great deal of the value away. Having an expiry date looming closer and closer motivates me to achieve the most I can out of this most magnificent gift.

 

[Ripheus27]

I'll at least argue for immortality not having to be repetitive. For all we know, the universe is infinite in content. If we were immortal and could traverse the entire cosmos, we'd undergo and witness an infinity of differences, enough to occupy ourselves for eternity perhaps. And I mean we might even come across differences that are as strange as completely new colors, or something as alien to all our normal units of perception (colors, sounds, tactile impressions, etc.) as those units are categorially alien to each other (that is, colors present much unlike sounds do).

If we could (and here I leave behind all but the faintest energies of my imagination) somehow ascend Cantor's ladder of aleph-numbers, if we could somehow "see" them in a concrete way, like aleph-712,502,342 were "right before our eyes" and we knew what kind of numbers were infinitely sealed therein, that'd be something. That'd be an eternal progression of somethings, even, because we'd be scaling an infinity of infinities.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The basic question is this: do you want to live forever and if so, why? Make an effort to defend the position of immortality as something we as humans desire and/or should desire. Ethics are of particular import here, not to mention aesthetics, metaphysics and epistemology to a certain extent.

As long as we're wishing, I would certainly sign up for eternal youth. Or even eternal just-about-middle-age.

All I am is my life and experiences on earth. I don't want it to come to an end, so I guess I do want to live forever. Ultimately, I don't expect eternal youth to come along, so at some point, infirmity will make existence become such a painful burden that I won't mind so much laying it aside and being extinguished.

Being forced to live literally forever, might indeed be a curse, but I feel certain I could keep myself amused for a much longer time than is mankind's lot. To be allowed to commit suicide when I had finally had enough would be ideal.

Of course it would be a catastrophe if all 7 billion of us (and our children and so on) could live forever, or even much longer than normal, unless strict population controls were enforced.

 

[Max S Cherry]

The basic question is this: do you want to live forever and if so, why? Make an effort to defend the position of immortality as something we as humans desire and/or should desire.

I certainly want to live forever. I think the reason that I want it, and also the reason why I think it is desirable for all people, is because its desirability is inseparable from it. Immortality comes from one of two places: either it was created by man or by something other than man. For this discussion, let us just say that it came from man. Man created the idea of immortality to combat the certainty of mortality. Mortality carries with it not merely death, but many other things as well, namely loss.

It can be loss of health, loss of loved ones, loss of time to do "X," but they all fall under the title loss. With mortality erased, those losses no longer come into play. There is always health, your loved ones never die, you always have time to do whatever you desire, and loss loses the worst of its sting. Of course, there would be setbacks and disappointment. Immortality is not a guarantee of everything you want when you want it, but it provides the time in which you might use to gain new wants or recapture lost wants.

Boredom is only relevant to us now because we have an appreciation for time and the restraints it places on us. I think that time is the ever present factor in our lives; it is the thing we gauge our lives by. I am 40 years old, so I am likely more than half-dead. Would I appreciate my life less if I knew I would never die? I do not see any reason to think so.

 

[juvenissun]

I had a thread before called "The Desirability of Immortality", though I think this Queen song works much better

The basic question is this: do you want to live forever and if so, why? Make an effort to defend the position of immortality as something we as humans desire and/or should desire. Ethics are of particular import here, not to mention aesthetics, metaphysics and epistemology to a certain extent.

I would argue that immortality is probably the worst curse one could wish on a person, since there is no real sense of progress, time, etc. I would sooner wish to be reborn/reincarnated, if there was no option for nonexistence, than to live forever, either as a disembodied spirit, or in some immortal body.

You are wrong from the beginning.

You WILL live forever, like it or not.

 

[muichimotsu]

I'll at least argue for immortality not having to be repetitive. For all we know, the universe is infinite in content. If we were immortal and could traverse the entire cosmos, we'd undergo and witness an infinity of differences, enough to occupy ourselves for eternity perhaps. And I mean we might even come across differences that are as strange as completely new colors, or something as alien to all our normal units of perception (colors, sounds, tactile impressions, etc.) as those units are categorially alien to each other (that is, colors present much unlike sounds do).

If we could (and here I leave behind all but the faintest energies of my imagination) somehow ascend Cantor's ladder of aleph-numbers, if we could somehow "see" them in a concrete way, like aleph-712,502,342 were "right before our eyes" and we knew what kind of numbers were infinitely sealed therein, that'd be something. That'd be an eternal progression of somethings, even, because we'd be scaling an infinity of infinities.

The problem is that infinity itself isn't desirable either. The natural progression of things is not to last forever, but to pass away. Even the bible argues this, or at least gets the point across occasionally. I'm reminded of a folktale involving Solomon and him requesting a ring that has the greatest wisdom written on it and what was given to him was a ring that said, "And this too shall pass awya"

It's not like knowledge is a bad thing, but limited knowledge is a necessity, otherwise one becomes too familiar and that breeds contempt as the saying goes.

 

[muichimotsu]

As long as we're wishing, I would certainly sign up for eternal youth. Or even eternal just-about-middle-age.

All I am is my life and experiences on earth. I don't want it to come to an end, so I guess I do want to live forever. Ultimately, I don't expect eternal youth to come along, so at some point, infirmity will make existence become such a painful burden that I won't mind so much laying it aside and being extinguished.

Being forced to live literally forever, might indeed be a curse, but I feel certain I could keep myself amused for a much longer time than is mankind's lot. To be allowed to commit suicide when I had finally had enough would be ideal.

Of course it would be a catastrophe if all 7 billion of us (and our children and so on) could live forever, or even much longer than normal, unless strict population controls were enforced.

Eternal youth is markedly different from eternal life in that youth is merely being young, not being unable to die. One might compare it to the elves in LOTR. Eternal life without eternal youth becomes a problem, as the Greek myth of Tithonus (iirc) shows.

 

[muichimotsu]

I certainly want to live forever. I think the reason that I want it, and also the reason why I think it is desirable for all people, is because its desirability is inseparable from it. Immortality comes from one of two places: either it was created by man or by something other than man. For this discussion, let us just say that it came from man. Man created the idea of immortality to combat the certainty of mortality. Mortality carries with it not merely death, but many other things as well, namely loss.

Loss is part of life, though. You can't argue that because there is something undesirable in something that we should do away with it entirely. Just because we generate something in our minds as something desired does not mean we should follow it either. Desires are born of ignorance, of greed, aversion. They aren't always negative, but they aren't automatically good because they exist.

It can be loss of health, loss of loved ones, loss of time to do "X," but they all fall under the title loss. With mortality erased, those losses no longer come into play. There is always health, your loved ones never die, you always have time to do whatever you desire, and loss loses the worst of its sting. Of course, there would be setbacks and disappointment. Immortality is not a guarantee of everything you want when you want it, but it provides the time in which you might use to gain new wants or recapture lost wants.

You're asking for utopia, which is in Greek, a place that literally is nowhere. Paradise and the like are just an escapist fantasy, trying to get away from the harsh reality we exist in. Just because life is hard is not a reason to create some fiction to ease the suffering.

Boredom is only relevant to us now because we have an appreciation for time and the restraints it places on us. I think that time is the ever present factor in our lives; it is the thing we gauge our lives by. I am 40 years old, so I am likely more than half-dead. Would I appreciate my life less if I knew I would never die? I do not see any reason to think so.

Time is how we gauge things, yes, especially death, in that with enough time, everything passes away to nothing. Ideas, material things, no matter the size or durability

I wouldn't appreciate my life if I could never die. One could become like the Kurgan in Highlander and keep putting yourself in near death situations just for the thrill of it, endangering others in the process because of your selfish desire driven by insanity and instability.

 

[muichimotsu]

You are wrong from the beginning.

You WILL live forever, like it or not.

Cute. Let me know when you want to actually defend this claim instead of patronizing and condescending to me because of my age or difference of belief, whatever the case may be.

I could just as easily assert that you won't live forever, like it or not, but I don't, because that isn't conducive to discussion.

 

[Max S Cherry]

Your points are well taken.

Loss is part of life, though.

Loss is a part of our life as it is, without immortality, but with immortality, loss is not so much a major issue.

You can't argue that because there is something undesirable in something that we should do away with it entirely.

To me, labeling something as undesirable is the same as labeling it "something to do away with entirely." Cancer is undesirable, and I would like to do away with it entirely. Immortality would accomplish that along with all other such diseases.

Just because we generate something in our minds as something desired does not mean we should follow it either. Desires are born of ignorance, of greed, aversion. They aren't always negative, but they aren't automatically good because they exist.

This is very true. But desires can be born of knowledge and love just as easily. The desire is not good because it exists, and each desire should be weighed individually.

You're asking for utopia, which is in Greek, a place that literally is nowhere. Paradise and the like are just an escapist fantasy, trying to get away from the harsh reality we exist in. Just because life is hard is not a reason to create some fiction to ease the suffering.

We are not talking about a fiction. We are talking about immortality, and why it is desirable and reasonably so. Utopia, for me, would be a place in which there was no disappointment, everybody would love everybody, and the world would be in perfect harmony, but I do not think immortality would bring that. Immortality would only give us more time to work toward a utopia, while it would still likely be unobtainable.

Time is how we gauge things, yes, especially death, in that with enough time, everything passes away to nothing. Ideas, material things, no matter the size or durability

This is the way of this world to some degree. It can be argued that ideas do not fade with time and merely change and pass from one to another. We would have to know the end of all before we could say that for sure. However, we are not talking about this world or this life we know. We are creating a new life in which immortality exists, and in our new, immortal life it is reasonable to assume that ideas would never have to pass away because the people having the ideas would never pass away.

I wouldn't appreciate my life if I could never die. One could become like the Kurgan in Highlander and keep putting yourself in near death situations just for the thrill of it, endangering others in the process because of your selfish desire driven by insanity and instability.

This is spoken as if you still have at least one foot grounded in mortal life. In an immortal existence, there are no near death situations, and you cannot endanger others. Also, there is no reason to assume that insanity and instability would be any more prevalent than they are now.

So are we talking about immortality existing and why it is desirable, or are we talking about why it is desirable to think immortality exists when it really does not? Those are two very different discussions.

 

[muichimotsu]

Loss is a part of our life as it is, without immortality, but with immortality, loss is not so much a major issue.

You're just adding immortality onto existence as if it's a given or as if we should just go along with it with no critical thought

To me, labeling something as undesirable is the same as labeling it "something to do away with entirely." Cancer is undesirable, and I would like to do away with it entirely. Immortality would accomplish that along with all other such diseases.

Immortality is a catch all easy way out of solving problems without considering that there are problems to immortality that I've already brought up: loss of significance to events, no understanding of gratitude, since there is no loss of those things that are precious to you, which means they lose their significance. The list could go on

This is very true. But desires can be born of knowledge and love just as easily. The desire is not good because it exists, and each desire should be weighed individually.

Then try weighing the pros and cons, because there are disadvantages to immortality, before you just conclude it's good

We are not talking about a fiction. We are talking about immortality, and why it is desirable and reasonably so. Utopia, for me, would be a place in which there was no disappointment, everybody would love everybody, and the world would be in perfect harmony, but I do not think immortality would bring that. Immortality would only give us more time to work toward a utopia, while it would still likely be unobtainable.

Immortality could just as easily create chaos, if not more probably than any sort of utopia.

This is the way of this world to some degree. It can be argued that ideas do not fade with time and merely change and pass from one to another. We would have to know the end of all before we could say that for sure. However, we are not talking about this world or this life we know. We are creating a new life in which immortality exists, and in our new, immortal life it is reasonable to assume that ideas would never have to pass away because the people having the ideas would never pass away.

It's the way of the world. You have no evidence to support your idea of life as real. And even if it were, ideas can just as easily pass away in significance because people no longer care to discover anything because there is no sense of disappointment, no imperfections, which are a benefit to existence as much as they can harm us. You're thinking far too idealistically about this and the defense seems to fall flat because of it. Ideas may not pass away as memories, but people may fail to even get new ideas to begin with due to the apathy generated by immortality

This is spoken as if you still have at least one foot grounded in mortal life. In an immortal existence, there are no near death situations, and you cannot endanger others. Also, there is no reason to assume that insanity and instability would be any more prevalent than they are now.

I can only conceive of a mortal existence in reality, as it is the only existence I've experienced. If I could not die, I might just as easily sink into depression and try to kill myself to no avail because I in no way want to live forever, seeing things decay around me as if time is frozen, one of the most significant things we experience as humans, time, temporality.

So are we talking about immortality existing and why it is desirable, or are we talking about why it is desirable to think immortality exists when it really does not? Those are two very different discussions.

I'm arguing immortality, if it exists or existed, is undesirable. And I'm also arguing one shouldn't think about immortality to begin with, since it's fundamentally flawed as a concept.

 

[Max S Cherry]

You're just adding immortality onto existence as if it's a given or as if we should just go along with it with no critical thought

I thought that was the point, so I miss understood. My apologies. If we are not going to hypothetically suppose that it exists, there is no way we can discuss it.

I'm arguing immortality, if it exists or existed, is undesirable. And I'm also arguing one shouldn't think about immortality to begin with, since it's fundamentally flawed as a concept.

If we cannot suppose that it exists, I do not see how you intend to discuss it at all. If we are not thinking about immortality, we cannot discuss it, and I do not see how you can arrive at the conclusion that it is fundamentally flawed without giving it thought. I do not know where to go from here.

 

[muichimotsu]

I thought that was the point, so I miss understood. My apologies. If we are not going to hypothetically suppose that it exists, there is no way we can discuss it.

Like in the last thread I did this, qualifying the nature of the immortality in some detail might help, since there are varying accounts and types of immortality in existence, mythological or otherwise.

If we cannot suppose that it exists, I do not see how you intend to discuss it at all. If we are not thinking about immortality, we cannot discuss it, and I do not see how you can arrive at the conclusion that it is fundamentally flawed without giving it thought. I do not know where to go from here.

I've given it thought, which means I have acknowledged a universe where it could exist, but this in no way means I am required to accept it as desirable. A world where pretty much any immortality exists would be a hellish existence, if only because death is as much a necessary part of existence as life is and to imbalance that is both impractical and inefficient. I'd prefer a universe where immortality is bestowed rather than innate, which I believe is a Seventh Day Adventist position, among a few other Christian denominations.

 

[juvenissun]

Cute. Let me know when you want to actually defend this claim instead of patronizing and condescending to me because of my age or difference of belief, whatever the case may be.

I could just as easily assert that you won't live forever, like it or not, but I don't, because that isn't conducive to discussion.

This is a simple logic, not much to argue about.

If you do believe life after life, then you WILL live forever, like it or not.
If you do not believe life after life, then you WILL NOT live forever, like it or not.

The answer is very simple. It is not up to what you think. It is up to what you believe.

The bad thing is: you have to choose one. There is no third option.

 

[elephunky]

*blind post*

I would not physically want to live forever. I actually look forward to what may or may not happen after I die, all in good time (I am not in a rush lol). I also do not think the world or even earth would benefit from me living forever, I have no importance in the grand scheme of things.

 

[muichimotsu]

This is a simple logic, not much to argue about.

If you do believe life after life, then you WILL live forever, like it or not.
If you do not believe life after life, then you WILL NOT live forever, like it or not.

The answer is very simple. It is not up to what you think. It is up to what you believe.

The bad thing is: you have to choose one. There is no third option.

I can say that I am not certain either way, but lean towards a probability. Science and philosophy are not beyond making tentative claims, since the absolute is a curse for science in particular; no progression, no advancement.

You've inverted your own position now. Originally you seemed to imply that this was about some objective truth you insisted on: that I would live forever regardless of belief, and now it is about belief? Either you're suddenly becoming relativist or you're not being clear in your argumentation...I'm leaning towards the latter

 

[muichimotsu]

*blind post*

I would not physically want to live forever. I actually look forward to what may or may not happen after I die, all in good time (I am not in a rush lol). I also do not think the world or even earth would benefit from me living forever, I have no importance in the grand scheme of things.

Even if we all had significance to the universe, which admittedly is a whole other topic in itself, our importance is increased because we don't live forever, not because we can continue to exist into infinity.

 

[elephunky]

Even if we all had significance to the universe, which admittedly is a whole other topic in itself, our importance is increased because we don't live forever, not because we can continue to exist into infinity.

I tend to agree.

I also find that our tiny little lifespan compared to the existence of earth/the universe can be very humbling which I believe to be a good thing.

 

[muichimotsu]

I tend to agree.

I also find that our tiny little lifespan compared to the existence of earth/the universe can be very humbling which I believe to be a good thing.

Humility is definitely one of the bigger things one gains from seeing things in a bigger perspective. Though some could argue that and still insist that immortality is a thing, but even if we granted it, I'd be wont to see a good argument, which I haven't so far.