3 ms·

Feel free to die then, but don't presume to speak for me. Death is a medical failure, and life doesn't stop being valuable after 75. That people are starting t

by arram 15y ago

Feel free to die then, but don't presume to speak for me. Death is a medical failure, and life doesn't stop being valuable after 75. That people are starting to view death as a medical failure is one of the best things that could happen. I personally don't expect to die of old age.

wpietri 15y ago
I personally don't expect to die of old age. Something said, I suspect, by every young person since the time of Hammurabi. I suppose that expecting to live forever in this world is no more irrational than expecting eternal life in another world. Feel free to die then Do you honestly think that was my point? That I'm looking forward to dying?
- thelibrarian 15y ago
  >> I personally don't expect to die of old age. > Something said, I suspect, by every young person since the time of Hammurabi. I suppose that expecting to live forever in this world is no more irrational than expecting eternal life in another world. One could argue that this is the crux of the world's oldest story, "The Epic of Gilgamesh".
- loup-vaillant 15y ago
  Probably not. But then, you're not being very consistent. First, do not conflate the current state of affairs with the desirable state of affairs. Second, if you wish for something for everyone, you wish it for yourself as well. The current state of affairs is certainly abysmal. Some live over a century, while others die in their childhood. We age before we die. I'd rather die at 75 with a healthy body rather than dying at 75 with 10 years of senescence behind me. So, a better system (should it be possible), would be to get rid of senescence. Even better, we could get egalitarian about death: no involuntary death before age X, at which point you die instantly. Sounds horrible? But it would be much better than the current system, where we let chance decide on the number of years we can live. Plus, you can actually make preparations for your departure. So, what value would you chose for X? And of course, it would apply to you as well.
  - wpietri 15y ago
    As far as I can tell, I'm being totally consistent. My point is that people are failing to distinguish between what they want (to live forever) and what they can achieve, and that by doing so they are causing a lot of waste and suffering, not achieving as much as they could. I agree that a world without aging would be better. I also think it would be a better world if the moon were made of cheese and I could get there by building a tall enough ladder. But if I spend all my life building ladders in service of that desire I'm a fool. We don't live in a world where people live forever or can avoid old age except by dying young. All composite things decay. There are so far no exceptions, and no solid theory that suggests otherwise. I am entirely in favor of medical research that seeks to improve and extend human life. But by not coming to grips with our impending deaths, we aren't living as well as we could. Take the guy upthread who thinks he will live forever. People like that check into hospitals every day unprepared for the reality they face. As the article makes clear, that wastes a lot of money and causes a lot of suffering.
    - crystalis 15y ago
      The article talks about extending suffering, not life. Few people who think they will live forever expect to do so wheezing with every breath. Shakespeare's sonnets are artfully composed, and I'd say we've done a decent job of keeping them around and finding uses for them.
      - wpietri 15y ago
        Let's review the bidding here. Somebody said "death is a medical failure." I said that it isn't; when you fail to achieve an impossible goal, the failure is in the goal, not the work done. I went on to say that all composite things decay, and that to expect that one is going to be the first exception is folly. I agree that few people imagining they can have eternal life think that they will suffer. But that's exactly the problem. They haven't thought it through. They don't yet understand what life is. Which is why they are so woefully unprepared to handle the parts that don't match their fictions. The bit about Shakespeare's sonnets I take to be a counterargument to "all composite things decay". That we have managed to keep 100k of text around for less than half a millennium seems like poor evidence that immortality will soon be ours. People die. Species die. Planets and suns die.
Tsagadai 15y ago
Most societies had a better connection to death than modern era societies. Death was seen as a necessary part of life and signs of mortality were presented to encourage people to do better in their lives. Death is inevitable. Even if you somehow gain true immortality our sun will burn out, our galaxy will split apart, our universe will accelerate towards c and render time meaningless. You cannot escape true death. Nothing you could say, do or know will ever change the fact that your life will end. You need to come to terms with that before the inevitable happens. Once you are aware that you will die it becomes easier to really live.
- lotu 15y ago
  Most societies had a better connection with slavery and torturen then we do that dosen't make it a good thing. If I can cheat death by a billion years I'll call that good.

by arram 15y ago

wpietri 15y ago

I personally don't expect to die of old age. Something said, I suspect, by every young person since the time of Hammurabi. I suppose that expecting to live forever in this world is no more irrational than expecting eternal life in another world. Feel free to die then Do you honestly think that was my point? That I'm looking forward to dying?

thelibrarian 15y ago
>> I personally don't expect to die of old age. > Something said, I suspect, by every young person since the time of Hammurabi. I suppose that expecting to live forever in this world is no more irrational than expecting eternal life in another world. One could argue that this is the crux of the world's oldest story, "The Epic of Gilgamesh".
loup-vaillant 15y ago
Probably not. But then, you're not being very consistent. First, do not conflate the current state of affairs with the desirable state of affairs. Second, if you wish for something for everyone, you wish it for yourself as well. The current state of affairs is certainly abysmal. Some live over a century, while others die in their childhood. We age before we die. I'd rather die at 75 with a healthy body rather than dying at 75 with 10 years of senescence behind me. So, a better system (should it be possible), would be to get rid of senescence. Even better, we could get egalitarian about death: no involuntary death before age X, at which point you die instantly. Sounds horrible? But it would be much better than the current system, where we let chance decide on the number of years we can live. Plus, you can actually make preparations for your departure. So, what value would you chose for X? And of course, it would apply to you as well.
- wpietri 15y ago
  As far as I can tell, I'm being totally consistent. My point is that people are failing to distinguish between what they want (to live forever) and what they can achieve, and that by doing so they are causing a lot of waste and suffering, not achieving as much as they could. I agree that a world without aging would be better. I also think it would be a better world if the moon were made of cheese and I could get there by building a tall enough ladder. But if I spend all my life building ladders in service of that desire I'm a fool. We don't live in a world where people live forever or can avoid old age except by dying young. All composite things decay. There are so far no exceptions, and no solid theory that suggests otherwise. I am entirely in favor of medical research that seeks to improve and extend human life. But by not coming to grips with our impending deaths, we aren't living as well as we could. Take the guy upthread who thinks he will live forever. People like that check into hospitals every day unprepared for the reality they face. As the article makes clear, that wastes a lot of money and causes a lot of suffering.
  - crystalis 15y ago
    The article talks about extending suffering, not life. Few people who think they will live forever expect to do so wheezing with every breath. Shakespeare's sonnets are artfully composed, and I'd say we've done a decent job of keeping them around and finding uses for them.
    - wpietri 15y ago
      Let's review the bidding here. Somebody said "death is a medical failure." I said that it isn't; when you fail to achieve an impossible goal, the failure is in the goal, not the work done. I went on to say that all composite things decay, and that to expect that one is going to be the first exception is folly. I agree that few people imagining they can have eternal life think that they will suffer. But that's exactly the problem. They haven't thought it through. They don't yet understand what life is. Which is why they are so woefully unprepared to handle the parts that don't match their fictions. The bit about Shakespeare's sonnets I take to be a counterargument to "all composite things decay". That we have managed to keep 100k of text around for less than half a millennium seems like poor evidence that immortality will soon be ours. People die. Species die. Planets and suns die.

Tsagadai 15y ago

Most societies had a better connection to death than modern era societies. Death was seen as a necessary part of life and signs of mortality were presented to encourage people to do better in their lives. Death is inevitable. Even if you somehow gain true immortality our sun will burn out, our galaxy will split apart, our universe will accelerate towards c and render time meaningless. You cannot escape true death. Nothing you could say, do or know will ever change the fact that your life will end. You need to come to terms with that before the inevitable happens. Once you are aware that you will die it becomes easier to really live.

lotu 15y ago
Most societies had a better connection with slavery and torturen then we do that dosen't make it a good thing. If I can cheat death by a billion years I'll call that good.