5 ms·

By living longer you are merely stealing resources from those that follow you. You can have immortality or reproduction - choose.

corobo 7y ago
Immortality please
- TelmoMenezes 7y ago
  I wonder if you would enjoy it as much as you imagine.
  - corobo 7y ago
    Well if the comparison is existing vs not existing I definitely wouldn't enjoy the latter due to not existing.
  - sicariusnoctis 7y ago
    Sure, why not? Then I could study all of mathematics, physics, computer science, or whatnot at my leisure! Right now, I can only experience the smallest of glimpses into incredibly interesting fields.
    - TelmoMenezes 7y ago
      Ok, so you are assuming that you would be immortal and free to pursue intellectual endeavors forever. This implies that all of your problems would be solved. You would be forever chasing the dopamine hit of understanding more of the fields that interest you. Or you could just shoot heroin. Without mortality or problems to confront, all meaning would be lost. Math, heroin, sex, all the same. Consider the dissolution of meaning, and the fact that infinity is a very very long time.
      - magduf 7y ago
        It's weird how people like you somehow think that immortal people would somehow be immune to gunshots or speeding buses. In reality, you'd have at most 1000 years before you were the victim of some tragic accident or murder.
      - D-Coder 7y ago
        "Live forever" here, I think, mostly means "Live indefinitely" — NOT "Live until the heat-death of the universe." And if you get bored after 500 years, you can always opt out. I'd like to have the choice to see if I do like it.
  - duckymcduckface 7y ago
    You're following the narative trope of one person being immortal and watching as everything around them dies. If everyone is immortal it would be much more mundane than you'd expect, think more to the tune of "happy 679th mom" or "man remember that song from 179 years ago?"
    - TelmoMenezes 7y ago
      > You're following the narative trope of one person being immortal and watching as everything around them dies. No, that is not the reason for my comment. It seems clear to me, both by life experience and reading related research that humans require meaning to have lives worth living. This might be a hard pill to swallow, but I suspect that it is ultimately our mortality that gives our lives meaning. If there is nothing to strive for, then there is only pleasure seeking. Your life becomes an infinitely long hedonistic binge. Human beings were not designed to withstand hedonistic binges for too long without dark consequences (as in, dissolution of meaning, extreme depression, etc). I guess you could argue that with infinite time, you could figure out how to redesign yourself until you are comfortable with immortality. But are you still yourself by then? Or is this problem also already solved by... just dying?
  - Shutaru 7y ago
    I honestly don't know if I would enjoy living forever, but I'd like to give it a try, just in case.
goatlover 7y ago
Immortality easily. Reproduction can be accomplished by other means.
yaya69 7y ago
reproduction
garmaine 7y ago
The universe is not zero-sum. Not for a long, long while in any case.
- sametmax 7y ago
  Yeah but the solar system is, unless we manage to escape it quickly.
  - garmaine 7y ago
    Neither is the solar system.
gnode 7y ago
Is there a need for so many new people? I don't see why the current pool of conscious agents can not live longer and reduce the frequency of ultimate personal tragedy. Few people are trying to make the case for shortening life in the interest of having more children, so is there anything special about the current balance to suggest we should not continue to push it further away from this? If ageing becomes something we can turn off, and we become biologically immortal, then I think the main unfortunate consequence is that the remaining causes of death become more dominant and are unnatural and unpredictable: accident; poverty; war; disease.
- magduf 7y ago
  More people, as long as we avoid massive overpopulation and resource depletion, should result in more technology. More technology means better resource usage, which enables more people to exist. There's plenty of room on the planet for more people, but not if everyone wants to live like a suburban American with 2 big SUVs and a McMansion with a huge lawn. If everyone lived like in Tokyo, we wouldn't be so worried about overpopulation. Better technology will also help us create more food without having to take up more land for it. Finally, technology will allow us to push into space and use that for both resource extraction, manufacturing, farming, and living, giving us space only limited by the amount of building material we can gather there.
malvosenior 7y ago
I would never classify being alive as “stealing resources” but regardless, you’re assuming that people don’t make meaningful contributions to society while alive. What if while you were living longer you cured cancer? Under your philosophy wouldn’t reproducing steal even more resources? If you have three children then you’re stealing them 3X faster.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rishav_sharan 7y ago
Immortality. There really isn't much of a choice here.
Nasrudith 7y ago
That doesn't make sense on several levels including mathematically. Two sterile immortals would use less resources than a stable progression of two child average couples in a generation. There would exist therefore a middling equivalent or lesser resource using immortal reproduction k per t or n additional projection than say N per generation mortals. Not to mention the theft framework is nonsensical - while it is a good thing to have sustainable systems and resources how can one steal from that which does not exist and may not ever even? Under that framework I could accuse anyone of wrongfully occupying the space of an entity which may only exist at the end of time after all intelligent life is dead - which is more absurd than the invisible pink unicorn arguements.
ahje 7y ago
I'm fed up with business meetings already. The thought of having to endure them for all of eternity sounds horrible! Reproduction, thanks! Wouldn't mind spending the last 10 years in good health though.
jhayward 7y ago
> By living longer you are merely stealing resources from those that follow you Have you carefully examined the logical outcome of such a line of thinking? Carousel, anyone? Is your life clock blinking?
m4r35n357 7y ago
I don't think many commenters got what I was trying to say. I'll have another go. Assuming you haven't done all the things you want to do in (say) 70 years, why would you say you need or deserve more time?

corobo 7y ago

Immortality please

TelmoMenezes 7y ago
I wonder if you would enjoy it as much as you imagine.
- corobo 7y ago
  Well if the comparison is existing vs not existing I definitely wouldn't enjoy the latter due to not existing.
- sicariusnoctis 7y ago
  Sure, why not? Then I could study all of mathematics, physics, computer science, or whatnot at my leisure! Right now, I can only experience the smallest of glimpses into incredibly interesting fields.
  - TelmoMenezes 7y ago
    Ok, so you are assuming that you would be immortal and free to pursue intellectual endeavors forever. This implies that all of your problems would be solved. You would be forever chasing the dopamine hit of understanding more of the fields that interest you. Or you could just shoot heroin. Without mortality or problems to confront, all meaning would be lost. Math, heroin, sex, all the same. Consider the dissolution of meaning, and the fact that infinity is a very very long time.
    - magduf 7y ago
      It's weird how people like you somehow think that immortal people would somehow be immune to gunshots or speeding buses. In reality, you'd have at most 1000 years before you were the victim of some tragic accident or murder.
    - D-Coder 7y ago
      "Live forever" here, I think, mostly means "Live indefinitely" — NOT "Live until the heat-death of the universe." And if you get bored after 500 years, you can always opt out. I'd like to have the choice to see if I do like it.
- duckymcduckface 7y ago
  You're following the narative trope of one person being immortal and watching as everything around them dies. If everyone is immortal it would be much more mundane than you'd expect, think more to the tune of "happy 679th mom" or "man remember that song from 179 years ago?"
  - TelmoMenezes 7y ago
    > You're following the narative trope of one person being immortal and watching as everything around them dies. No, that is not the reason for my comment. It seems clear to me, both by life experience and reading related research that humans require meaning to have lives worth living. This might be a hard pill to swallow, but I suspect that it is ultimately our mortality that gives our lives meaning. If there is nothing to strive for, then there is only pleasure seeking. Your life becomes an infinitely long hedonistic binge. Human beings were not designed to withstand hedonistic binges for too long without dark consequences (as in, dissolution of meaning, extreme depression, etc). I guess you could argue that with infinite time, you could figure out how to redesign yourself until you are comfortable with immortality. But are you still yourself by then? Or is this problem also already solved by... just dying?
- Shutaru 7y ago
  I honestly don't know if I would enjoy living forever, but I'd like to give it a try, just in case.

goatlover 7y ago

Immortality easily. Reproduction can be accomplished by other means.

yaya69 7y ago

reproduction

garmaine 7y ago

The universe is not zero-sum. Not for a long, long while in any case.

sametmax 7y ago
Yeah but the solar system is, unless we manage to escape it quickly.
- garmaine 7y ago
  Neither is the solar system.

gnode 7y ago

Is there a need for so many new people? I don't see why the current pool of conscious agents can not live longer and reduce the frequency of ultimate personal tragedy. Few people are trying to make the case for shortening life in the interest of having more children, so is there anything special about the current balance to suggest we should not continue to push it further away from this? If ageing becomes something we can turn off, and we become biologically immortal, then I think the main unfortunate consequence is that the remaining causes of death become more dominant and are unnatural and unpredictable: accident; poverty; war; disease.

magduf 7y ago
More people, as long as we avoid massive overpopulation and resource depletion, should result in more technology. More technology means better resource usage, which enables more people to exist. There's plenty of room on the planet for more people, but not if everyone wants to live like a suburban American with 2 big SUVs and a McMansion with a huge lawn. If everyone lived like in Tokyo, we wouldn't be so worried about overpopulation. Better technology will also help us create more food without having to take up more land for it. Finally, technology will allow us to push into space and use that for both resource extraction, manufacturing, farming, and living, giving us space only limited by the amount of building material we can gather there.

malvosenior 7y ago

I would never classify being alive as “stealing resources” but regardless, you’re assuming that people don’t make meaningful contributions to society while alive. What if while you were living longer you cured cancer? Under your philosophy wouldn’t reproducing steal even more resources? If you have three children then you’re stealing them 3X faster.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

rishav_sharan 7y ago

Immortality. There really isn't much of a choice here.

Nasrudith 7y ago

That doesn't make sense on several levels including mathematically. Two sterile immortals would use less resources than a stable progression of two child average couples in a generation. There would exist therefore a middling equivalent or lesser resource using immortal reproduction k per t or n additional projection than say N per generation mortals. Not to mention the theft framework is nonsensical - while it is a good thing to have sustainable systems and resources how can one steal from that which does not exist and may not ever even? Under that framework I could accuse anyone of wrongfully occupying the space of an entity which may only exist at the end of time after all intelligent life is dead - which is more absurd than the invisible pink unicorn arguements.

ahje 7y ago

I'm fed up with business meetings already. The thought of having to endure them for all of eternity sounds horrible! Reproduction, thanks! Wouldn't mind spending the last 10 years in good health though.

jhayward 7y ago

> By living longer you are merely stealing resources from those that follow you Have you carefully examined the logical outcome of such a line of thinking? Carousel, anyone? Is your life clock blinking?

m4r35n357 7y ago

I don't think many commenters got what I was trying to say. I'll have another go. Assuming you haven't done all the things you want to do in (say) 70 years, why would you say you need or deserve more time?