4 ms·

Do people really think that death is optional, and the problem is that we're opting into it?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
goatlover 2y ago
Some people see death from aging as eventually being curable. Obviously, something is going to kill you sooner or later. But why must it be old age? Assuming you survive long enough, who wants to spend their last years in body that's breaking down, with diminished cognitive and physical abilities?
DaoVeles 2y ago
While I get the desire of folks to live forever, IF it is possible I still think it is a VERY long way off. All I advocate for is quality of life. It feels like every time we make an advancement, we discover two new things to solve. Eventually we will get there but it might be a lot longer road than we anticipate. Sorry Aubrey De Gray, I don't think this is something that can be solved for a billion dollars like he has claimed. Eat your fruit, veggies, nuts and whole grains, but don't over do it on the food! Move it or lose it. Build bridges, don't burn them! I don't say this so you can have smaller pants or live an extra decade, that would be a neat side effect, I say this so that you can live a happy fun life as much as possible.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Do people really think that death is optional, and the problem is that we're opting into it? It's material to the question of researching aging and longevity. A lot of people will come out singing death's praises.
inglor_cz 2y ago
If I reframe your question slightly, too many people think about aging as an inevitable, unstoppable, undelayable process. That is why we only have serious longevity research now, and that is why much of it is sponsored by billionaires or venture capitalists, because governmental agencies don't even comprehend the potential utility of it and relevant research must be reframed as anti-Alzheimer or whatever. Once humanity gets rid of this prejudice, a venue towards much healthier and longer life is open.
- Nasrudith 2y ago
  Of course governments don't comprehend the utility of it - they are an immortal social structure made of coercion consisting entirely of replaceable and self-replenishing parts. It benefits from immortality no more than eusocial insects would from a longer lifespan. Ironically any governments that would pursue lifespan extension is thus inherently "corrupt" in that it is technically self-serving on the part of its administrators. Except for those with a clear voter mandate setting that goal of course. Secession is already baked in just about every government system excepting deliberately unstable ones (favored by autocratic using the threat of chaos when they die as a shield). To governments that functionally makes it a "solved problem".

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Some people see death from aging as eventually being curable. Obviously, something is going to kill you sooner or later. But why must it be old age? Assuming you survive long enough, who wants to spend their last years in body that's breaking down, with diminished cognitive and physical abilities?

DaoVeles 2y ago

While I get the desire of folks to live forever, IF it is possible I still think it is a VERY long way off. All I advocate for is quality of life. It feels like every time we make an advancement, we discover two new things to solve. Eventually we will get there but it might be a lot longer road than we anticipate. Sorry Aubrey De Gray, I don't think this is something that can be solved for a billion dollars like he has claimed. Eat your fruit, veggies, nuts and whole grains, but don't over do it on the food! Move it or lose it. Build bridges, don't burn them! I don't say this so you can have smaller pants or live an extra decade, that would be a neat side effect, I say this so that you can live a happy fun life as much as possible.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Do people really think that death is optional, and the problem is that we're opting into it? It's material to the question of researching aging and longevity. A lot of people will come out singing death's praises.

inglor_cz 2y ago

If I reframe your question slightly, too many people think about aging as an inevitable, unstoppable, undelayable process. That is why we only have serious longevity research now, and that is why much of it is sponsored by billionaires or venture capitalists, because governmental agencies don't even comprehend the potential utility of it and relevant research must be reframed as anti-Alzheimer or whatever. Once humanity gets rid of this prejudice, a venue towards much healthier and longer life is open.

Nasrudith 2y ago
Of course governments don't comprehend the utility of it - they are an immortal social structure made of coercion consisting entirely of replaceable and self-replenishing parts. It benefits from immortality no more than eusocial insects would from a longer lifespan. Ironically any governments that would pursue lifespan extension is thus inherently "corrupt" in that it is technically self-serving on the part of its administrators. Except for those with a clear voter mandate setting that goal of course. Secession is already baked in just about every government system excepting deliberately unstable ones (favored by autocratic using the threat of chaos when they die as a shield). To governments that functionally makes it a "solved problem".