Do you want immortality?

So if there is heat death, but we continue to exist, that means that we are not of this universe. So, if we are pretending that, I'll pretend I can scoot off to some other universe and continue living there. I'll also pretend that I'll never develop a permanent mental disease while we're at it. Then Paul will repost and pretend that those are not options available to me.

IOW, in make believe it's easy enough to make up some conditions that would either make us want to continue to live, or not to. What's the point in that game?

Yeah that's the problem I've always had with this question...

It is more a question that reveals people's logical faculties, and personal preferences, than one with any valid answer...

"Would you opt for immortality in the form of a fish?"

Surely part of what makes us what we are is our mortality?
 
The Many Worlds hypothesis implies that we already have immortality, whether we want it or not.

Surprise...
 
The Many Worlds hypothesis implies that we already have immortality, whether we want it or not.

Surprise...
Does this mean everything is bound up in potential? If so, where does this potential reside?
 
Yeah that's the problem I've always had with this question...
It is more a question that reveals people's logical faculties, and personal preferences, than one with any valid answer...
True to an extent. No one expects much in the way of valid answers at the onset. Through careful deliberation and contemplation an understanding will emerge. How do we react on the first day of legitimately declared immortality or to be more realistic, extremely long life-spans. The cracking of the aging process. Are we not programmed to die? Maybe it’s a matter of changing the programming.
"Would you opt for immortality in the form of a fish?"
That would be impractical from our standpoint now, of course. Maybe we'll end up as some machine hybrid or our bodies replaced entirely by something better with our consciousness intact. I’d say we’re at the infant stage of the merging of man and machine right now. Brain damage reversal and neural enhancements (improving memory, spatial skills, etc…) will probably follow. The future will hopefully be bright if we don’t screw it up.
Surely part of what makes us what we are is our mortality?
What we are continues to evolve. I imagine a time when people will look back in horror at our present day lifespan. We're just beginning to emerge from the Dark Ages of medicine.
 
So I just got myself a good reaming on Skepticsrock for suggesting, nay, insisting that immortality would soon become horrifically boring and people would opt out of it.

Well, I do know that 74 years, if you're lucky, sure as hell isn't enough. I can easily conceive of living 3-500 years no sweat, without boredom. Several thousand, more likely. If you cure obesity and the work week is 3 hours long, probably a lot more than that since pigging out on pizzas and greasy cheeseburgers is extremely satisfying.


Some folks were claiming that they would like to live forever. I was insistent that it would become unbearable.

People got angry with me for claiming to know their feelings on the matter better than they did. Fair enough. But we also touched on the idea that the thought of immortality is somehow comforting. I don't understand this. I asked why, but I don't think I got an answer.

Well, here are some issues for those planning to live forever:

- Even curing or preventing every single disease known to mankind as well as general old age, you'll still more likely than not die in an accident in something like 5,000 years. Living a careful life, plus extremely advanced technology that can save all but the most destructive of accidents might get you 20k-100k years, but sooner or later the statistics will catch up with you. Even if you get to a million without faceplanting in a plane at 500mph, there are still the issues of murders and the like.

I read a sci-fi story once where, in the distant future, if you got into physical trouble, your body would automatically shut down and go into a long term storage/protection mode, awaiting rescue, rather than let the cells die off. Hence drowning even would not be a problem.

But deliberate acts and severe accidents will always be around. Even if you avoid doing any risky things, a plane might have an emergency landing on your bedroom at 3 in the morning.


- It's ok to imagine, as I do, chugging pizza and burgers and stir-fry 24/7 into a perpetually healthy body, but for millions of years? Billions? Googolplex years? And we're only just getting started.

- In the very long term, start thinking goolol years down the road, mathematically there are only a finite number of meaningfully different combinations of atoms and whatnot that can occur, so repetition is inevitable. The only way around this will be partial mind wipes to keep things fresh. Indeed, the most obvious way around the Fermii paradox is that this is happening already. It also solves the one objection that we're about to kill ourselves off. Specifically, the argument that, since you exist now, and that the population is growing rapidly, that it's more likely that we're about to wipe ourselves out than that you just happened to be born in the early stages of human existance. Of course, that argument could be told to Thomas Jefferson or Jesus or Hammurabi or some Egyptian king 10,000 years ago, and they would have also thought humanity about to expire by the same logic and they'd have been wrong.


I brought up god and "ultimate purpose," too, but people claimed that had nothing to do with the matter. However, I noticed that peoples' picture of this immortality seemed all nice and happy and limitless (they mentioned exploring new worlds and such). This sounds like some sort of heaven to me, not mundane immortality. It was as if immortality would be cool as long as it was also perfect.

Well, I reject the notion that evil must exist in order for good to have meaning. Going back to the cheeseburger and pizza concept, I don't have to be starving just to have great enjoyment of them. Nor does torture need to exist in order to enjoy an orgasm. I think people could exist for a long while just enjoying the positive aspects without needing the negative ones. Not forever, for that you'd need the regular partial mind-wipes, but for quite awhile.
 
To live forever as a mortal? Nope, not for me. That would be way too limiting, not to mention boring.

You would still suffer the same long-term problems as an angel or whatever in Heaven. Indeed you'd run out of things to do even sooner since sex with total strangers for non-reproductive purposes would be banned, not to mention the gluttony of cheesburger consumption.

Unless you propose, as some do, that merely worshipping in the presence of God is more pleasurable than a 14 year old boy ejaculating inside his hot, 42 year old English teacher, for the very first time. In that case, I'd agree with you, although an extended life as a mortal wouldn't suck, either.

Let's solve the "70 year old" problem, first, and then re-visit the issue in our 500's. Everyone agreed?
 
Death, in a few decades.

Constraint, a limited lifetime, in this case, energizes and motivates.

"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with a rainy Sunday afternoon."
Susan Ertz

Ah, but yes, what is motivation for? It is to make things better. If all wants and needs are satisfied, you can still have a motivation for pleasure, for a hedonistic lifestyle. Motivation as enabler of a moral work ethic has meaning only in a reality in which a work ethic is useful.

I'll pass on the next reality if it ennobles a work ethic.
 
Roger said:
So if there is heat death, but we continue to exist, that means that we are not of this universe. So, if we are pretending that, I'll pretend I can scoot off to some other universe and continue living there. I'll also pretend that I'll never develop a permanent mental disease while we're at it. Then Paul will repost and pretend that those are not options available to me.

immortal:

1 : exempt from death *the immortal gods*
2 : exempt from oblivion : IMPERISHABLE *immortal fame*

I don't mean to keep moving the goalposts, but, as many people have said, it's not clear where the goalposts are anyway. You can put the goalpost anywhere you like, but I think it has to be pretty far away. Otherwise it's an opt-out immortality, which doesn't count. I guess immortal until the end of the universe is pretty reasonable. Certainly past my limit.

One of my primary reasons for asking this question is that people said, I thin, that the idea of immortality gave them comfort. I've heard people say the same about reincarnation and about going to Heaven. I don't understand this. What is it about any of these things that is comforting? Is there some sort of "inherent comfort" in them?

~~ Paul
 
Well, I do know that 74 years, if you're lucky, sure as hell isn't enough. I can easily conceive of living 3-500 years no sweat, without boredom. Several thousand, more likely. If you cure obesity and the work week is 3 hours long, probably a lot more than that since pigging out on pizzas and greasy cheeseburgers is extremely satisfying.
Quest for knowledge and social interaction will be what drives us. Food (sad for me to say this but I’m trying to imagine the future here) will be unnecessary. We will have found a better way for sustenance. Our bodies seem terribly inefficient. For gosh sakes, we have to feed them several times a day. I will miss a good surf & turf or greasy burger too. I’m sure by then there will be better substitutes.

Well, here are some issues for those planning to live forever:

- Even curing or preventing every single disease known to mankind as well as general old age, you'll still more likely than not die in an accident in something like 5,000 years. Living a careful life, plus extremely advanced technology that can save all but the most destructive of accidents might get you 20k-100k years, but sooner or later the statistics will catch up with you. Even if you get to a million without faceplanting in a plane at 500mph, there are still the issues of murders and the like.
By then don’t you think we would’ve shed our fragile bodies? Not to mention individuals would likely have their consciousness backed up for regeneration? Maybe that’s available on the the premium plan only… not sure. I foresee us more as balls of energy consciousness in the distant future where winged modes of transportation would be a burp in some historical archive.

I read a sci-fi story once where, in the distant future, if you got into physical trouble, your body would automatically shut down and go into a long term storage/protection mode, awaiting rescue, rather than let the cells die off. Hence drowning even would not be a problem.
Fascinating concept! Never heard it before.

But deliberate acts and severe accidents will always be around. Even if you avoid doing any risky things, a plane might have an emergency landing on your bedroom at 3 in the morning.

- It's ok to imagine, as I do, chugging pizza and burgers and stir-fry 24/7 into a perpetually healthy body, but for millions of years? Billions? Googolplex years? And we're only just getting started.
The universe by then might feel constraining. It will become the fish tank that the Earth is to us now. That I envision might be our most difficult task to break free of. Escape or create into alternate universes… as concerns about depleting the existing universe’s energy supplies grow to fever pitch.

- In the very long term, start thinking goolol years down the road, mathematically there are only a finite number of meaningfully different combinations of atoms and whatnot that can occur, so repetition is inevitable. The only way around this will be partial mind wipes to keep things fresh. Indeed, the most obvious way around the Fermii paradox is that this is happening already. It also solves the one objection that we're about to kill ourselves off. Specifically, the argument that, since you exist now, and that the population is growing rapidly, that it's more likely that we're about to wipe ourselves out than that you just happened to be born in the early stages of human existance. Of course, that argument could be told to Thomas Jefferson or Jesus or Hammurabi or some Egyptian king 10,000 years ago, and they would have also thought humanity about to expire by the same logic and they'd have been wrong.
Your finite number exists from the combinations known today. Maybe we’ve just scratched the surface in terms of granularity?

Well, I reject the notion that evil must exist in order for good to have meaning. Going back to the cheeseburger and pizza concept, I don't have to be starving just to have great enjoyment of them. Nor does torture need to exist in order to enjoy an orgasm. I think people could exist for a long while just enjoying the positive aspects without needing the negative ones. Not forever, for that you'd need the regular partial mind-wipes, but for quite awhile.
I agree except for the mindwiping segment. Mindwiping might be useful to expunge irrelevant or negative memory. I’m not sure I quite understand the redundancy problem rising to the debilitating level you suggest. Redundancy for any other reason except "backup" purposes would likely get pruned.

We would hopefully be wise enough as a super intelligent civilization not to expand beyond the limits of our resources and quality of being. What worries me is the future of individuality. A passionless Borg-like race existence is not the future I would create or want to participate in. Without emotions as the driving force to our logic, we lose the hallmark of our humanity. What irony if a machine-like form or incorporeal existence is what’s required to save that.
 
immortal:

1 : exempt from death *the immortal gods*
2 : exempt from oblivion : IMPERISHABLE *immortal fame*

I don't mean to keep moving the goalposts, but, as many people have said, it's not clear where the goalposts are anyway. You can put the goalpost anywhere you like, but I think it has to be pretty far away. Otherwise it's an opt-out immortality, which doesn't count. I guess immortal until the end of the universe is pretty reasonable. Certainly past my limit.

One of my primary reasons for asking this question is that people said, I thin, that the idea of immortality gave them comfort. I've heard people say the same about reincarnation and about going to Heaven. I don't understand this. What is it about any of these things that is comforting? Is there some sort of "inherent comfort" in them?

~~ Paul
I would take no solace in reincarnation. To me, that’s like dying. You live on with "maybe" a vague memory of a previous life… not good enough.
 
Just imagine, You will be able to swim to the depths of the deepest ocean and climb the highest mountain and infact go into outer space without a space suit.
 
Because people die here too.

Who is to say that the "eternal afterlife" is not just a series of "afterlives" and "death" is like the pressing of the reset button to a new afterlife? In a sense, the belief in reincarnation is a belief in immortality.
 
Who is to say that the "eternal afterlife" is not just a series of "afterlives" and "death" is like the pressing of the reset button to a new afterlife? In a sense, the belief in reincarnation is a belief in immortality.
An afterlife is different than a reset button. While both are forms of afterdeath, if you will, afterlife implies that you never have to go through pre-afterlife again.

In my earlier days I posited that maybe there's just one soul, and that it not only hops between people who have just died and people who have been conceived, but that it jumps backwards in time too, so that this one soul, at the end of everything, will have lived every life ever. But it was kind of a goofy idea.
 
Maybe you meant we couldn't give an accurate answer, not a meaningful one. I would agree with that.
I think pondering outside the box creates a meaningful start in addressing this topic. The first generation that grapples with this issue will have to consider the impact of immortality (or very long life) before it ever happens. Just because our answer today might not be accurate shouldn't stop us from beginning a dialogue. Considering these possibilities now gives us a headstart in debating its ramifications. We might be on the verge of extending the human lifespan significantly within our lifetime. We should already be preparing for these inevitable realities.

Ok. Humm. The thing I think that would keep us from killing ourselves from boredom would be 'shared consciousness'. Many of the holy grails of woodom today could be accessed with technology: Telepathy especially, sharing experiences on an entirely new and more direct level via new interfaces with the brain.

Without gaining more access to each other, eternal life would be like living the movie Groundhog Day: taking only slightly longer to resolve all the permutations. (Eternity is a really long time compared to the longest finite).
 
There's two different things people mean when they mention immortality.

The first -- the immortality that's impervious to death -- applies to (supposedly) God, our souls, Highlander, etc.

The other is the kind that might someday be achievable, if we conquer disease and aging; the kind where you don't have to die, but it's possible via accident (and maybe even inevitable, if the expansion of the universe is "open" and destined for heat death).

It's hard to imagine being opposed to the second kind (though some are). You could always suicide and be out of it. Some people here, though, seem to be assuming the question is asking about the first kind. It's really two separate questions.
 
In the very long term, start thinking goolol years down the road, mathematically there are only a finite number of meaningfully different combinations of atoms and whatnot that can occur, so repetition is inevitable.


I disagree, totally. Maybe if our brains were digital, but they're not, by a long shot. Given what we know about the interplay of atoms, repetition of a particular brain state is not only not inevitable, it's well nigh impossible.

Not to mention the fact that an upper limit on brain growth has not been established. Without that, no claims about the inevitability of repetition can be made.
 
There's an interesting (I think) question related to this topic, which we even get to know the answer to in our lifetimes --

Are the (very broad) personality trends associated with aging ("crotchetiness", lack of desire to learn new things, distrust of modern advances, etc.) a product of:
a) the number of years you've spent on the planet? or;
b) your proximity to death?

In other words, in your opinion, if our lifespans are expanded to, say, 300 years, will 80- and 90-year-olds still exhibit these traits, or will it not happen until people are 280 or 290 or so?
 

Back
Top Bottom