4 ms·
Looking back at this story now, I think I disagree with its argument. Yes, old age today is a costly drain on modern western societies but mostly because people
by ladyattis 5y ago
Looking back at this story now, I think I disagree with its argument. Yes, old age today is a costly drain on modern western societies but mostly because people are living much longer. If our society was accepting of euthanasia for people who don't want to suffer in old age as it was of trying to keep the old living as long as possible then maybe the cost wouldn't be so draining. The idea that we MUST live for as long as possible without any sense of what the person who's living through the suffering of the diseases that become more severe with old age shows how little we value those people. If we really did value the elderly we'd ask if they want to continue to live or allow them to choose to end their lives with their own subjective sense of dignity instead. This isn't to say I'm opposed to any kind of medical research to improve life in our final years. Anything that retains physical autonomy and removes pain from old age is great but the obsession with death itself is problematic to me. In my opinion, life ain't worth living if it leaves me in an adult diaper being constantly pumped full of drugs to just keep myself sane with the pain and indignities.
- nilstycho 5y agoYou say the idea presented is “that we MUST live for as long as possible…” But the author claims that isn't his idea: > The argument is not in favor or life-span extension per se. Adding extra years of sickness and debility at the end of life would be pointless. The argument is in favor of extending, as far as possible, the human health-span. By slowing or halting the aging process, the healthy human life span would be extended. Individuals would be able to remain healthy, vigorous, and productive at ages at which they would otherwise be dead.