3 ms·

Wanting to live forever has to be the apex of egoism and arrogance and all that is wrong with the human mind. Death is good because it leaves room for new peopl

by bambax 11y ago

Wanting to live forever has to be the apex of egoism and arrogance and all that is wrong with the human mind. Death is good because it leaves room for new people with new ideas. Being against death reveals a profound misunderstanding about what life is about, which is: finiteness, urgency, novelty, creativity.

tomhoward 11y ago
Agreed. Something I've been thinking about for a while is: what would it mean for peoples' willingness to save another person from a burning building, or swim to rescue someone drowning at sea, or donate a kidney, etc, if we all developed a sense of entitlement that we should be able to live forever? When so many people at all levels of society are unable to enjoy the lives they have, I feel that life extension research is not something that should be a high priority for investment.
eli_gottlieb 11y ago
>Death is good because it leaves room for new people with new ideas. Congratulations: you've managed to point out one of the very, very few nice things about having your body slowly but unstoppably degrade for six decades starting in your mid-20s.
zanny 11y ago
You can add more people without destroying the information contained in their predecessors. We are on the cusp of interstellar travel, once we are no longer bound to our singular space rock our population no longer needs to have limits.
increment_i 11y ago
I suspect you're going to get hammered here but this is an incredibly important point. Aging and death forces the passing of the torch from the old generation to the new, and I think this is a crucial part of progress. A tragedy on par with death would be the rise of some oligarchical class of immortal technocrats, wielding power and influence for centuries on end.
- Abraln 11y ago
  I can see the job description now: "75+ years of relevant experience required." At the same time, allowing the Einsteins of society to continue their work indefinitely would provide a net increase in the rate of scientific advancement. Unfortunately climbing the corporate ladder would be nearly impossible as positions would almost never go vacant. It has both pros and cons, but allowing a larger fraction of the population to be in the workforce might just outweigh the negatives.
  - bpicolo 11y ago
    > would provide a net increase in the rate of scientific advancement And then we existentially argue "Does any of it matter?" :)
    - zardo 11y ago
      More time to think about that too.
- Joof 11y ago
  I don't think it would ever happen, but the only real counter I can think of to that is modifying our brains to have intermittent periods where they are more plastic than normal. Honestly, our current system works really really well... I still don't want to die though.
- aminorex 11y ago
  Hypothetical bogey men of an imaginary dystopia should not concern you nearly so much as the loss of productive life, physical and mental decay, and the reckless violence of the hopeless which surrounds you today.
  - increment_i 11y ago
    A valid point, but why should the pessimistic outlook be any less likely than the utopian one? Are you sure that a major missing link between where we are now and a prosperous future for everyone is the fountain of youth? Sure, the HN'ers want the Einsteins and Feynmans of the world to live forever? But what about the Nixons, King Leopold II's, and Kim Kardashians of the world? Is it okay with you that they will be given first dibs at the antidote? You're seeing it as the key to suffering, but its equally reasonable to view it as what it will likely become - an instrument of power.
dantheman 11y ago
Not everyone has to share your profound insight about the meaning and purpose of life. This is a classic example of a limited rationalised mindset. Imagine how much more enriched people lives would be if they got to know their great grandparents and more. Death is a tragedy, there is nothing stopping you and others who share your beliefs from ending life at any moment they want. This is about options, think about the potential -- it would change society is so many ways.
elros 11y ago
I think defining other people to be "profound[ly] misunderstanding what life is about" just because they do not believe the same as you when it comes to something so fundamental and personal as one's life is much closer to "the apex of egoism and arrogance and all that is wrong with the human mind". We don't need room for new people with new ideas, room isn't the issue: as far as we know so far, the Universe is virtually infinite. When we come around to defeating death (it's bound to eventually happen) we'll start terraforming, doing generation-ships to reach even further, and the rate of growth of human knowledge will reach an even more unimaginably fast pace.
aminorex 11y ago
"Wanting to live forever has to be the apex of egoism and arrogance..." I would gladly sacrifice my life to prevent the rest of the species suffering the physical agony, mental degeneration, poverty, frustration, and violence which result from pandemic senescence. Your moralizing aesthetic judgements do not justify the misery of billions of people, or inaction in the face of its preventable imminence.

by bambax 11y ago

tomhoward 11y ago

Agreed. Something I've been thinking about for a while is: what would it mean for peoples' willingness to save another person from a burning building, or swim to rescue someone drowning at sea, or donate a kidney, etc, if we all developed a sense of entitlement that we should be able to live forever? When so many people at all levels of society are unable to enjoy the lives they have, I feel that life extension research is not something that should be a high priority for investment.

eli_gottlieb 11y ago

>Death is good because it leaves room for new people with new ideas. Congratulations: you've managed to point out one of the very, very few nice things about having your body slowly but unstoppably degrade for six decades starting in your mid-20s.

zanny 11y ago

You can add more people without destroying the information contained in their predecessors. We are on the cusp of interstellar travel, once we are no longer bound to our singular space rock our population no longer needs to have limits.

increment_i 11y ago

I suspect you're going to get hammered here but this is an incredibly important point. Aging and death forces the passing of the torch from the old generation to the new, and I think this is a crucial part of progress. A tragedy on par with death would be the rise of some oligarchical class of immortal technocrats, wielding power and influence for centuries on end.

Abraln 11y ago
I can see the job description now: "75+ years of relevant experience required." At the same time, allowing the Einsteins of society to continue their work indefinitely would provide a net increase in the rate of scientific advancement. Unfortunately climbing the corporate ladder would be nearly impossible as positions would almost never go vacant. It has both pros and cons, but allowing a larger fraction of the population to be in the workforce might just outweigh the negatives.
- bpicolo 11y ago
  > would provide a net increase in the rate of scientific advancement And then we existentially argue "Does any of it matter?" :)
  - zardo 11y ago
    More time to think about that too.
Joof 11y ago
I don't think it would ever happen, but the only real counter I can think of to that is modifying our brains to have intermittent periods where they are more plastic than normal. Honestly, our current system works really really well... I still don't want to die though.
aminorex 11y ago
Hypothetical bogey men of an imaginary dystopia should not concern you nearly so much as the loss of productive life, physical and mental decay, and the reckless violence of the hopeless which surrounds you today.
- increment_i 11y ago
  A valid point, but why should the pessimistic outlook be any less likely than the utopian one? Are you sure that a major missing link between where we are now and a prosperous future for everyone is the fountain of youth? Sure, the HN'ers want the Einsteins and Feynmans of the world to live forever? But what about the Nixons, King Leopold II's, and Kim Kardashians of the world? Is it okay with you that they will be given first dibs at the antidote? You're seeing it as the key to suffering, but its equally reasonable to view it as what it will likely become - an instrument of power.

dantheman 11y ago

Not everyone has to share your profound insight about the meaning and purpose of life. This is a classic example of a limited rationalised mindset. Imagine how much more enriched people lives would be if they got to know their great grandparents and more. Death is a tragedy, there is nothing stopping you and others who share your beliefs from ending life at any moment they want. This is about options, think about the potential -- it would change society is so many ways.

elros 11y ago

I think defining other people to be "profound[ly] misunderstanding what life is about" just because they do not believe the same as you when it comes to something so fundamental and personal as one's life is much closer to "the apex of egoism and arrogance and all that is wrong with the human mind". We don't need room for new people with new ideas, room isn't the issue: as far as we know so far, the Universe is virtually infinite. When we come around to defeating death (it's bound to eventually happen) we'll start terraforming, doing generation-ships to reach even further, and the rate of growth of human knowledge will reach an even more unimaginably fast pace.

aminorex 11y ago

"Wanting to live forever has to be the apex of egoism and arrogance..." I would gladly sacrifice my life to prevent the rest of the species suffering the physical agony, mental degeneration, poverty, frustration, and violence which result from pandemic senescence. Your moralizing aesthetic judgements do not justify the misery of billions of people, or inaction in the face of its preventable imminence.