How should we pursue human longevity?
milan.cvitkovic.net
How should we pursue human longevity?
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#2I think that the consideration of arguments against extending human longevity is very flippant, and deserves some serious pushback. As Max Planck pointed out, ”A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
Regardless of that, given the veneer of rationality in discussions of this topic (not just this source, but more generally) are there any strong arguments for extending human lifespans? The four reasons following “Because death is bad” (including footnote 4) seem like a superficial analysis based on a cartoonish model/philosophy of life.
Personally, it seems far more useful to think about how we might make human life happier and more meaningful; longevity research seems particularly pointless & banal as it is unlikely to improve well-being in any significant way in and of itself. (I’m not referring to preventing unnatural mortality, but extending median lifespan). (This is somewhat opinionated, and of course, others are welcome to alternative opinions.)
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#3Here is another bad argument missing from appendix:
Organisms are evolved to utilise short life-spans to quickly adapt changing environmental conditions.
Let’s assume humanity finds a cure to death and also without dwelling into dystopia that this finding is cheaply available to everyone. What will most likely happen is that bad ideas will haunt the humanity forever as older generations won’t die and remove their bad ideas with them. There might come a point that humanity will completely collapse due to rule by elders where they can be expected to accumulate much of the available wealth. So bad ideas of older generations can lead to total collapse of species.
Honestly I don’t see anything other than dystopia occurring with the cure to death, regardless if it is expensive or cheap.
I’m also impressed people want to live forever, this is something I cannot possibly understand, don’t people at least want to see what is at the other side? Do they think they will never get bored from material existence?
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#4Here is another bad argument missing from appendix: Organisms are evolved to utilise short life-spans to quickly adapt changing environmental conditions. Let’s assume humanity finds a cure to death and also without dwelling into dystopia that this finding is cheaply available to everyone. What will most likely happen is that bad ideas will haunt the humanity forever as older generations won’t die and remove their bad…
What do you mean by the other side?
Biological immortality (negligible senescence) would not prevent suicide, homicide or accidental death.
Why should we be bored?
The universe is a large and complex space, And there are many mysteries to solve...
And when the real world is too boring it is always possible to create/explore virtual worlds.
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#5Here is another bad argument missing from appendix: Organisms are evolved to utilise short life-spans to quickly adapt changing environmental conditions. Let’s assume humanity finds a cure to death and also without dwelling into dystopia that this finding is cheaply available to everyone. What will most likely happen is that bad ideas will haunt the humanity forever as older generations won’t die and remove their bad…
This an interesting original take, bravo.
Death is clearly an evolutionary result as species all live in a different range of lifespans. It can neatly argued that we are now seeing consequences of this just by extending lifespans from 60 to mid 80s in both economics and governance.
It's always nice when HN truly shifts a perspective.
Have one internet on me today.
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#6Here is another bad argument missing from appendix: Organisms are evolved to utilise short life-spans to quickly adapt changing environmental conditions. Let’s assume humanity finds a cure to death and also without dwelling into dystopia that this finding is cheaply available to everyone. What will most likely happen is that bad ideas will haunt the humanity forever as older generations won’t die and remove their bad…
you are making a couple of assumptions that will probably not be true for immortal humans: 1) you are assuming people will continue to behave the same way (reproduction, consumption, learning, jobs, etc). 2) you are assuming population increase 3) you are assuming that we will continue staying on Earth (immortality has some advantages when it comes to space travel) 4) you assume science will progress at the same pace as today (i think it will go much much faster) 5) you are assuming that our final form is biological
also, how do you know there is another side?
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#7I think that the consideration of arguments against extending human longevity is very flippant, and deserves some serious pushback. As Max Planck pointed out, ”A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” Regardless of that, given the veneer of rationality in discu…
I completely disagree, I think life would be much more meaningful if the potential to fully experience was not so time-restricted.
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#8Here is another bad argument missing from appendix: Organisms are evolved to utilise short life-spans to quickly adapt changing environmental conditions. Let’s assume humanity finds a cure to death and also without dwelling into dystopia that this finding is cheaply available to everyone. What will most likely happen is that bad ideas will haunt the humanity forever as older generations won’t die and remove their bad…
"Don’t people at least want to see what is at the other side?
Sure, but I want to do it on my schedule, and it would be nice to have some level of understanding of "what's next after death" before I choose that option.
Do they think they will never get bored from material existence?
Oh, probably; but I think it will take me somewhere north of 500 years before I tire of being alive. Even if Earth is boring, I'd rather move to another planet rather than just off myself out of boredom.
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#9I think that the consideration of arguments against extending human longevity is very flippant, and deserves some serious pushback. As Max Planck pointed out, ”A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” Regardless of that, given the veneer of rationality in discu…
i am going to guess you are somewhat young (<60). watch how your opinion shifts as you get older
Re: How should we pursue human longevity?
#10i think the answer is yes. there is also an argument to be meant for healthspan vs lifespan (ie you don’t necessarily live much longer but the quality of life is dramatically improved)