Living Forever - Not via Planeria-based psuedo-science

[xepherys]

Sorry, the thread title amused me...

At any rate, what about the possibility of actually living forever as yourself. With the advent of organ replacement, even with organs not donated, but rather grown from stem cells, which can also replace simple tissues aside from full-fledged organs. This coupled with the concept of anti-oxidants and better and more in-depth knowledge of vitamins and minerals that support, maintain and rebuild bodily materials and function, is it not possible that one human being could live, if not forever, for a VERY long time (hundreds of years perhaps)?

What are your thoughts? What science suggests that this could happen in a few generations? What science refutes it?

[combatmedicjen]

I hope we don't live that long. We're SUPPOSED to die!!!!

God, can you even imagine the overpopulation if people NEVER DIED!!??

[xepherys]

No, as science progresses I believe we will find alternative living arrangements via:

a) Building upwards

b) Building DOWNWARDS (might even be easier)

c) Moving the populace off of Earth altogether (not terribly far fetched)

[combatmedicjen]

Originally Posted by xepherys

No, as science progresses I believe we will find alternative living arrangements via:

a) Building upwards

b) Building DOWNWARDS (might even be easier)

c) Moving the populace off of Earth altogether (not terribly far fetched)

Alright, we can find PLACES to put people, but how will you feed all of them? There are so many starving countries now as it is... and people starving right here in America. What makes you think we wouldn't run out of food or energy or materials because of the huge overpopulation?

[xepherys]

There's more than enough food produced to feed the entire populace of our planet several times over. Nobody bothers to give the food that's in excess to those who really need it. That wouldn't be fixed by having less people and probably wouldn't get much worse by having more. It's just part of the filth that is humanity.

As for energy, there's an abundance of non-petroleum energy to get the world by for eons, even at double the population (or probably triple or greater). We don't use energy efficiently and don't explore new avenues of energy due the the political (monetary) requirements of the few. Again, this isn't something that would get better with less people, and likely wouldn't grow too much worse with more people.

[combatmedicjen]

If the world isn't changing now, when we know full well that we're running out of petroleum and not getting food, which we apparently have in abundance, to those who need it, why do you think that the whole human race will change its ways in the future? What leads you to believe that we'll suddenly realize that, "oh, wow, we have tons of food! Let's divide it evenly! Wow, isn't this great??" and "Oh, look at this nifty fuel cell, let's give one to EVERYBODY!!"?? Seriously, the human race is not that advanced as a whole. Overpopulation of that severity would surely cause massive starvation and energy crises.

[xepherys]

I don't think that we would suddenly divide food evenly or give his and her fuel cells as a fifth anniversay gift. I'm just saying that, as a whole, if you were to reduce the population by 25% over ten years, it would not significatnyl decrease these issues. By the same token, I doubt increasing it by 25% would make them much worse.

Is it odd we're the only people debating this topic, and we're two rooms apart?

[combatmedicjen]

One room, dorkbrain.

[KellyC]

IMO, the life span of the human race is more than long enough already. Trying to prolong it even more is just unnecessary. It'd be better to focus on how to live life to it's fullest, not many people can do that...

[xepherys]

KellyC-

I agree with you to the extent that people need to better themselves. But if one could spend 1000 years seeking enlightenment, I think the race would be better off in many ways. Our typical teenage/youth days no longer allow us enough time for freedom to explore. The bulk of the best of our life is spent working like a lunatic to make ends meet. By the time we don't have to work anymore, our bodies are more frail, we are more prone to illness and we tend to live vicariously through our younger family members.

If youth was from 0-30 instead of 0-18... if we worked from 30-100 instead of 18-65 and we lived on, in good health from 100- say... 200 instead of living in acceptable health from 65-85 just think of what could come of it. You could go back to school, further the base of your knowledge, teach, study your own spirituality, whatever, and you'd have more time to do it and not feel rushed.

I guess, simply put, I think the lifespan of a human is altogether MUCH to short to truly appreciate all that life has to offer.

[KellyC]

You're saying when people are working, they can't enjoy a full life and all (or some in this case) the goodness that it has to offer?

[xepherys]

when one is working 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, one tends to miss out on a lot of things... Sure, there's still a lot of great things you can do, but there are a lot of things you cannot do as easily. Especially with a family, bills, et cetera to worry about. I'm NOT saying that life cannot be enjoyable or good, I'm just saying there are many things that you COULD do if you didn't have those things to worry about (or lived significantly longer).

[Rekna]

Thats why you should find a job that you enjoy. A job where you would do the work even if you didn't get paid. Sure not everyone can do this but you can always strive for it.

[xepherys]

Rekna-

I agree with that. I'm seriously considering a life in academia (very little pay) for research and the continuation of my Army National Guard military duty (very little pay). But still, if my passion was travel, and I spent the entirety of a 60 year adulthood travelling, I'd still not see everything I want. If my passion were to teach, no amount of time teaching would let me reach out to "enough" younger people. You can make your existing life much more fruitful, sure... but a few hundred extra years could make it amazing!

[Dudeburge]

I'd get too boring to live forever. Sure you'd see a whole bunch of cool tech and what not in the future, but being so old and senile you wouldn't really want to use it anyway.

We've been put here for a determinte amount of time and I think it should stay that way.

[ARTelevision]

No. I do not want to live forever.

I prefer to be a permanent part of the universe in whatever form. I suppose it's some sort of carbon atom.

Being a carbon atom for all time (except for this brief moment in which there is an identity that is associated with what is called "me") is fine.

[xim]

If you all want your minds blown, get on your preferred p2p client and download "the acceleration of knowledge" by robert anton wilson. Its probably in 2 45 minute peices, it TOTALLY covers this whole topic.

When you get it, dont hesitate to post your opinions.

[KellyC]

Originally Posted by xepherys

Rekna-

I agree with that. I'm seriously considering a life in academia (very little pay) for research and the continuation of my Army National Guard military duty (very little pay). But still, if my passion was travel, and I spent the entirety of a 60 year adulthood travelling, I'd still not see everything I want. If my passion were to teach, no amount of time teaching would let me reach out to "enough" younger people. You can make your existing life much more fruitful, sure... but a few hundred extra years could make it amazing!

So...you want to live long so you can "do more stuff" is that correct? If so, my question is: when will it be enough?

[xepherys]

Originally Posted by KellyC

So...you want to live long so you can "do more stuff" is that correct? If so, my question is: when will it be enough?

Why does there have to be "enough"? In the true pursuit of knowledge, knowing everything is the only bounds. Since even in a thousand years one could not know EVERYTHING, then there is never enough knowledge, experience or interest.

Originally Posted by Dudeburge

I'd get too boring to live forever. Sure you'd see a whole bunch of cool tech and what not in the future, but being so old and senile you wouldn't really want to use it anyway.

We've been put here for a determinte amount of time and I think it should stay that way.

Well, part of this whole argument is that science and medicine (and the science of medicine) are allowing for people to live longer, happier, healthier lives as it is. Two hundred years ago, a human beings average life expectancy was only ~45-60 years. VERY few humans lived to be 100+. Now it's a fairly common occurance. As we learn to grow older, we learn to stay healthier longer. If you don't become senile until you're 160, then what's wrong with living to 175? I mean, in a comparitive fashion to today going senile at 80 and living to be 90?!

Originally Posted by xim

If you all want your minds blown, get on your preferred p2p client and download "the acceleration of knowledge" by robert anton wilson. Its probably in 2 45 minute peices, it TOTALLY covers this whole topic.

When you get it, dont hesitate to post your opinions.

How large is this file? Any chance you could email it to me? If so, I'd pe happy to post it on my website and link it for anyone interested.

Originally Posted by ARTelevision

No. I do not want to live forever.

I prefer to be a permanent part of the universe in whatever form. I suppose it's some sort of carbon atom.

Being a carbon atom for all time (except for this brief moment in which there is an identity that is associated with what is called "me") is fine.

ART-

I've noticed your quite the wordsmith. I'm happy to be a part of the universe in whatever fashion nature dictates. If I have the choice to retain this identity longer, and do with it what I shall, then I would take that option.

[KellyC]

Perhaps we have different ideas on "enough." To me it is a satisfactory amount, it might not be ALL (or as much as possible), but I'll be content with what I have and therefore it is enough for me. I see where you're going with this (finally eh? ). I still stand by my previous statement.

[ARTelevision]

xepherys, IMO as far as "existence" goes, "this identity" is the problem. Hard to imagine folks love themselves so much that they want to hold on to their earthly identities.
I'm aware this is so. I just find it hard to comprehend.

[xepherys]

ART-

It's not a matter of self-love or even self-preservation that motivates my drive to live on... it's a greedy thirst for knowledge and experience. It's even more specifically a mind bent on discovery and wisdom.

[ARTelevision]

I figure this is what it is and there's a whole big universe out there that "this" is a part of.

I'm happy to be a carbon atom for all "time"...

It does strike me as amazing the kinds of illusions that carbon atoms seem to develop. I guess one illusion is as good as another.

[Reese]

if we could live forever anyways, why do we need food? or oxygen?

[Zdragva]

Yes i agree, as we only have one life we should be in a position to do anything we want before we die, and we are not, its simple. not becuase we dont live long enough or becuase we work constantly but because no one see's us for what we really are. As humans we re the spectators to the art gallery of the universe, if life on earth went out, or we continue as we do now then we just totally and completly abuse our gift. man has worked hard since his birth in africa, because he had to, now a days 1 person can live 100 years and do NOTHING. not likely but possible, which is nice for them, but think... mankind as a whole could decide many things on its own future and we could truly become in the future what none of us can imagine now. I predict extreme longevity to be in existance in less than 100 years, i predict wars over the secret, and i also predict VAST social problems, unless.. we do move off earth, not all but we at least consider leaving home as a species. Also there is benefits to certain people that mankind doesnt ever become a Aristotle style Eudemonia or Paradise, at least in the short term, never underestimate mans desire for sheort term wealth/power to ruin his medium term aims of world peace etc. We live in a universe that is a massive power source untill the last baryon matter decays in several trillion years time, thats when the matter in our bodies decays. Untill a few hundred years ago (and barring natural disasters) the Earth was THE perfect place for any creature, there is still near limitless fuell from the sun, and as long is there is fuel we can live. our problems with power isnt lack of, its TYPE . You cannot fit a nuclear reactor to a car. Basiclly when fossil fuels dry up the internal combustion engine as we know it will cease to exist (or work whatever) no our problems will be mankind specific we wont simply run out of food etc. like our animal brethren we will find that in 'todays modern world' nature hasnt really been considered, she's treated like the wolf is to a shepherd, a potential killer, a definate pest. when nature always has and always will determine every last detail of our existance. We're going to run out of room thats for sure, as the rest of the world reaches the stage the west or the developed world was at late 90's to today we're going to have fierce commercial and industrial battles with our brothers AND try telling a semi hostile country it has to abide by pollution laws when barely years ago its towns and cities were getting leveled. you will have to get the message across to everyone and theyll have to understand its a species wide must, and frankly i doubt as a Scottish guy that the rest of the world will listen to the babble of the west about habitats etc. when ur african orphan discovers he can make millions or billions in the modern world by exploitation, as he will no doubt be used to himself. im just saying we all grow up and live in this world we have created for ourselves and we seldom take a good deep look past it to see what there is for us. there are planets we could live on, asteroids we could mine, moons we can scrape semi-organic matter off, seas, chemicals, medicines and technology yet contempleted beyond Earth, its a fact, lets move off earth before we cant, before some idiot nukes our only space launch centres and before we half poisen ourselves in the persuit of the ultimate man made drug, money. money is the human equivelent of the scent of the ant or the dance of the bee, it keeps everything WITHIN our social structures ticking along nicely and makes sure work is done, fellows are fed and young get born, but its not really REAL in the sence its a must, we have made it essential i would be surprised if its not our downfall

[lemon0444]

Well....I'd have to agree with living a lot longer than we do now. For so many reasons.

One being that right now technology is advancing faster than it ever has in the history of our race. I often find myself worrying that i'm not going to be around long enough to see what life is like when we finally are able to leave this planet. Of course i love earth, but travelling on this relativly small planet is just not enough for me. I want explore the stars (I know...very treky). I read this series about people colonizing Mars by Kim Stanley Robenson, and it just made me watnt to go there even more. I agree living forever probably wouldn't be to fun, but doubling, or even tripeling our livespans sounds great. It these books, shortly after the first colonists arrived on mars, a few of the genetic specialists(sp?) figured out a way to do just that. It had to do with some sort of gene therapy that repaired all the cell division errors in tho body that add up as we get older. Very interesting, and it seemed scientifically plausable too. Anyways, the universe is sooo big, and I just want to see 'as much' of it as I can. A longer lifespan would sure help....

[stonegrody]

I'm actually looking forward to what's next even if it may be absolutely nothing. We are meant to die. It is our design. Living forever would only cause more problems for the overall population. If someone discovers a way to do it, have fun. I'll be chillin in my grave

[ARTelevision]

stonegrody, you're a smart man.

very well put.

[Zubon]

Mis-quoting Woody Allen: "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying."

I could stand living for as long as it goes. I really enjoy it. If time stretches on into eternity, then I will have a lot of time to be whatever it is that I am next, and if this whole personal identity thing is not a part of it, I think I will just enjoy it for as long as I can. This works for me. There may be something better, but I have not heard many strong contenders for something better than personal existence, so I look forward to enjoying this existence for as much time as I can.

Maybe older folks disagree, but I find that life is good, and I never have had too much of it. Some times are briefly slow, but I am happy. How much happiness is enough? I find that my life expands to encompass whatever joys I can find.

Maybe that whole carbon atom thing will work out. There is some abstract sense in which I acknowledge the likelihood of the destruction of personal identity, but for the moment I am somewhat tied to it.

[Ustwo]

Getting old sucks.

You guys can die if you want to see whats next, if I had the choice I'd live forever.

With my knowlage of biology I'd say we are at least 100 years away from imortality, so its a moot point for us.

[klo]

No immortality for me. It'll get boring after a while. And also like in Harry Potter, what Dumbledore says, Death is the next greatest adventure (or something like that, haven't read it in a few years)

[t193r7]

Even if technology allows us to not die from old age, remember there's still accidents.