61–70 of 146 posts
Even if we „solved“ death and disease, accidents and wars would end our live eventually. Lifespan would increase for sure (I think there was a model that predicted sthg like 500 years?), but immortality just won’t work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dualism will lead to only a very basic understanding of existence. Death, nor cancer, are good or bad. Jesus might have had the whole thing wrong after all. Of maybe humanity, as its so often does, misinterpreted His teaching. Before we knew about cancer, and yes there was a time we did not know what cancer was, was canned good or bad? Did we even see natural death as bad? So where did these constructs come from? And…
Overpopulation can be solved while increasing the human population, by eliminating people's environmental footprint. This is a much better way of solving the issue of overpopulation than consciously avoiding solving the problem of aging. A larger population, that sees an acceleration in the rate of per capita human capital accumulation, as a consequence of aging being solved, could also be a huge boon for other lifef…
Ha! I have heard of people trying to control the world but I have never seen it accomplished. Yes, there are many impossible possibilities that can only be created with fascism.
Peter Thiel once said something along the lines that nobody is against aging research, because in practice what you’re solving for are problems everybody wants cures for, like Alzheimer’s, cancer, Parkinson’s, etc. I often think about that quote because aging is such an intractably hard problem, we’ve sort of collectively rationalized it as something “good”. You see it in many religious traditions. In the zeitgeist.…
This is even more the case in a world on the verge of ecological and social collapse where the age expectancy is lowering.
Even if we „solved“ death and disease, accidents and wars would end our live eventually. Lifespan would increase for sure (I think there was a model that predicted sthg like 500 years?), but immortality just won’t work.
Peter Thiel once said something along the lines that nobody is against aging research, because in practice what you’re solving for are problems everybody wants cures for, like Alzheimer’s, cancer, Parkinson’s, etc. I often think about that quote because aging is such an intractably hard problem, we’ve sort of collectively rationalized it as something “good”. You see it in many religious traditions. In the zeitgeist.…
Is such an existence worth living? You would be no different than a straw on wind with all its movements explained by physical laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dualism will lead to only a very basic understanding of existence. Death, nor cancer, are good or bad. Jesus might have had the whole thing wrong after all. Of maybe humanity, as its so often does, misinterpreted His teaching. Before we knew about cancer, and yes there was a time we did not know what cancer was, was canned good or bad? Did we even see natural death as bad? So where did these constructs come from? And…
Overpopulation can be solved while increasing the human population, by eliminating people's environmental footprint. This is a much better way of solving the issue of overpopulation than consciously avoiding solving the problem of aging. A larger population, that sees an acceleration in the rate of per capita human capital accumulation, as a consequence of aging being solved, could also be a huge boon for other lifef…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a lot of words, but I still don't see a justification why death (I.e. the end of life) is not a problem for people that do not want to stop living (most people).
Yeah, I was confused as well. I think the argument is that it's a slippery slope to a different thing, and since the different thing is bad, solving for death is bad too. I don't think that runs.
you correctly appreciate the structural way in which the argument works.
but you still do not seem to want to see the underlying subltety; that death and life are merely parts of the same larger entity and that our language (our rationalist analytical way of thinking) makes us "miss the forest for the trees", to focus on life and death as opposing rival forces when in fact they're different edges(ends, or sides) of the same larger phenomenon.
Peter Thiel once said something along the lines that nobody is against aging research, because in practice what you’re solving for are problems everybody wants cures for, like Alzheimer’s, cancer, Parkinson’s, etc. I often think about that quote because aging is such an intractably hard problem, we’ve sort of collectively rationalized it as something “good”. You see it in many religious traditions. In the zeitgeist.…
That's a deep mischaracterization of positions against aging research. People are against because in the way it's conducted and given the existing social order, it will reinforce inequalities and make the world a worst place. If you are more privileged you will live longer and have more chances to concentrate money and power for yourself or your family and away from less privileged people. This is even more the case…
It's a particularly bad argument here because mitigating the harmful effects of aging would result in massive reductions in medical expenses. Governments and insurance companies would be highly incentivized to get them to as many people as possible.
Peter Thiel once said something along the lines that nobody is against aging research, because in practice what you’re solving for are problems everybody wants cures for, like Alzheimer’s, cancer, Parkinson’s, etc. I often think about that quote because aging is such an intractably hard problem, we’ve sort of collectively rationalized it as something “good”. You see it in many religious traditions. In the zeitgeist.…
> Peter Thiel once said something along the lines that nobody is against aging research, because in practice what you’re solving for are problems everybody wants cures for, like Alzheimer’s, cancer, Parkinson’s, etc. > I often think about that quote because aging is such an intractably hard problem, we’ve sort of collectively rationalized it as something “good”. You see it in many religious traditions. In the zeitgei…