3 ms·

I understand the practical issues with older generations lasting forever, but I think it's better for society to place limitations on these matters, rather than

I understand the practical issues with older generations lasting forever, but I think it's better for society to place limitations on these matters, rather than nature placing the permanent limitation of death. Presidents have 4 year terms. Why can't people have 80 years where they're allowed to vote, and then lose that right forever? Or maybe they can be sent to a separate society where they're permitted to vote and debate things that apply to their own sphere, but must still follow universal laws set by a "central society", to prevent deeply immoral actions. For example, maybe alcohol is permitted to be permanently illegal in their society, but they still aren't allowed to lynch people or prosecute people without due process. These are certainly very difficult problems to solve, and there are many counter-arguments to that particular. But I think there are solutions to these issues other than death, and I think many of those solutions are much preferable to death. A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress.

imakesnowflakes 11y ago
>A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress. I don't think so. That is just wishful thinking. Our current society cannot even produce leaders who are remotely capable of solving current problems. And a group of immortals, once in power, cannot be trusted to not try to remain in office indefinitely using the powers they already have. They can subtly influence society and people with their power so that they can continue in power without actually rigging the elections..
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Hopefully their immortality would put in perspective the usual bullshit most politicians care about. Short-term decisions and wealth-seeking is in a big way driven by both short life and short office terms.
- meowface 11y ago
  True, it's a bit idealistic. I absolutely agree there is serious potential for mis-use here. However, I think the benefits of life longevity are very serious, and if we can overcome some of the issues they cause, we should do everything in our power to find new ways to extend life longer and longer (or at least provide it as an option for people). In the next 100+ years when this starts looking a little more feasible, hopefully people will have better perspective and insight into these issues, and will establish ways of allowing society to progress and not be anchored by a group of early-immortal voters, legislators, or perhaps tyrants.
ArekDymalski 11y ago
>A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress I think that the adaptation phase would be a very turbulent one,because we would experience the giant gap between reality and our heritage. Most our motivators, values and culture in general are founded around the idea that we do not have that much time (think about stuff like taking care of others, parenthood, work-life balance, achievements etc.) Without the time constraints many of these would become obsolete. But they're "hard wired" inside our organisms. And would cause problems just like adrenaline rushes and other (once useful) reactions to stress cause problems today.

imakesnowflakes 11y ago

>A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress. I don't think so. That is just wishful thinking. Our current society cannot even produce leaders who are remotely capable of solving current problems. And a group of immortals, once in power, cannot be trusted to not try to remain in office indefinitely using the powers they already have. They can subtly influence society and people with their power so that they can continue in power without actually rigging the elections..

TeMPOraL 11y ago
Hopefully their immortality would put in perspective the usual bullshit most politicians care about. Short-term decisions and wealth-seeking is in a big way driven by both short life and short office terms.
meowface 11y ago
True, it's a bit idealistic. I absolutely agree there is serious potential for mis-use here. However, I think the benefits of life longevity are very serious, and if we can overcome some of the issues they cause, we should do everything in our power to find new ways to extend life longer and longer (or at least provide it as an option for people). In the next 100+ years when this starts looking a little more feasible, hopefully people will have better perspective and insight into these issues, and will establish ways of allowing society to progress and not be anchored by a group of early-immortal voters, legislators, or perhaps tyrants.

ArekDymalski 11y ago

>A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress I think that the adaptation phase would be a very turbulent one,because we would experience the giant gap between reality and our heritage. Most our motivators, values and culture in general are founded around the idea that we do not have that much time (think about stuff like taking care of others, parenthood, work-life balance, achievements etc.) Without the time constraints many of these would become obsolete. But they're "hard wired" inside our organisms. And would cause problems just like adrenaline rushes and other (once useful) reactions to stress cause problems today.