2 ms·
I was replying to MichaelGG's statement: Just because it seems inevitable, we should not make it socially acceptable to give up and view death as anything but
by meric 11y ago
I was replying to MichaelGG's statement:
Just because it seems inevitable, we should not make it socially acceptable to give up and view death as anything but the wickedness it is.
As I said before,
Lengthening life span? That's a different matter.
EDIT: Reply to below, that's a good explanation, thanks. I don't think I could come up with it so clear and succinct, if I could I would have!
- kbenson 11y agoYes, I was trying to address specifically that I think you are arguing a points with is somewhat orthogonal to the current discussion, because both are using similar terms to mean different things. Your terminology is more correct (you are addressing death as a specific concept, and it's inevitability), while they are addressing age extension, possibly to it's logical conclusion a the end of the universe, but using "death" to denote that, when it's obvious there are other causes of death that cannot be stopped. In other words, I think there is no real difference of opinion, just a difference in terms making it seem so. This appears to have been exacerbated slightly through your flowery description of your point, which I take to be: "Death of is impossible to stop in the end, and giving the false impression that it is may be harmful. That said, if we can retard it in humans to a large degree, that's useful. Additionally, death serves a useful purpose in many systems, so we shouldn't lose sight of this."