The thing I fear most about death, is that it will make me Immortal.
IMO immortality would be hideously boring. It seems that time creeps past at the moment; how much worse would that become after a century? This might just be my teenage new-romantic mindset talking, but I think that 70 years will be more than enough for me.
Extended longevity we can expect, but not immortality; the continuity problem means that clones or robots could provide no solution for the ageing of the brain. I suspect the ceiling will be at most 150 years until nanotechnology and biochemistry are amazingly more advanced than in the foreseeable future. However, the pace of technological advance is always increasing, and I honestly have no idea how far we will progress this century.
Pax, please further your reasoning. If you only mean that after so many years you would become bored, then I can understand you reasoning, but any other reasons than that?
Personally, I think that eventually you would learn to overcome boredom and learn new ways to expand your horizons. Hasn’t anyone seen highlander?! One of the greatest movies of all time, or at least it was when I was a kid.
I have to say Highlander is one of my all time favourites, so much so that I bought Highlander 2 and watched Highlander 3 twice! If you’ve seen either of these movies you’ll understand just how deep my love for the first movie is. 
The character Connor always came across as a sad person, who had to live in his past for happiness. His light faded when his first wife died, that’s when he came to realise what immortality meant. Love is a moment’s joy, whose sorrowful loss must be carried for an eternity.
I don’t want to live forever for many reasons. For one, like I’ve posted in this poem Immortality, No Thanks! I believe I would grow bored with my own thoughts, and at some point I’d reach a limit to my own abilities. Unless of course I also become limitless with immortality, but at that point I’d probably reminisce about the good ol’ days when I was limited, and all the joys I had learning everything from scratch. Then again maybe that’s why I’m living in a world where I have no idea where I came from, or (more importantly now) where I’m going. Could this world be a Paradise for Immortal Limitless Beings? Kind of like being dominated by my ignorance gives me some kind of almost sexual kick? The climax of which is death, the ultimate trip into the unknown where all becomes ignorance, and for a split moment I get an orgasmic rush from the uncertainty of my future, till slowly I come to realise as the veil of ignorance is lifted, that once again I have become my former self, an immortal omniscient being.
But seriously…
I’m not frightened by death or the thought that I will no longer exist. If you were to psychoanalyse this, some might say I don’t love anything enough to miss. This would be true, there’s nothing in life that I’ve grown so attached to that I would miss it, even my own friends, family or even my own personality with all it’s many experiences. The idea of having to carry ‘my baggage’ for eternity, never forgetting anything I’ve done, living with the good and the bad, and knowing that it’s shaping my future in subconscious ways, which I could never come to realise or have the control to consciously change. Maybe its failure I truly fear, and death’s but a key to escape. Somewhere I can go if or when I have sabotaged my own life and the mind is an empty shell living in a warm body. Then might it be best to remove the mind and allow nature to recycled the body.
Change and diversity, as far as I’m concerned is what stimulates growth, the mind as it grows old tries to stop the change, as if rigor mortis has already set in. There are so many walking dead in this world its amazing, I’ve looked into peoples eyes and seen the abyss. If this where the world of the immortals, I would say within two to three generations they’d all end up insane. Could the mind cope with having to relearn everything it has come to take for granted. It’s the confident ignorance of youth that sets the pretext for the new world, would the old be willing to accept the new, or just demand that they turn down the volume!
Of course there’s the practical issue of overpopulation, where are all these old people going to live, well it’s really the young that should be worried. If old people aren’t going to die as quickly lots more housing will be needed, and food. You can forget about retirement till you’re at least 120 years old, before you enjoy your remaining 50 in Florida. Think of all the birthday presents you’ll have to by for all the great great grandchildren, you’re talking on average 16 of them, 8 great grandchildren, 4 grandchildren, and your own 2 children which spawn all the others, that’s 30 a year, now lets not get started on all your cousins and their children. This to me seems like hell!
The wish for immortality symbolises narrowedness to me. It presupposes that humans aren’t part of something immortal and can be made immortal. However, I think humans are part of something immortal and that would be the reason to never “dying” becoming possible. But it’s a goal that reveals restlessness; having lost contact with what’s essential/believing in an imaginary world. It’s artificial and would without doubt be a result of ultimate conservatism, because it gives the impression of backing up the illusionary idea of autonomic humans. It’s all about trying to make the world appear like what it isn’t. It’s terrifying that people are afraid of what’s real. What’s real is what is and should be utterly comforting. Discomfort arises as soon as one’s mind is filled with illusions.
Well, my theory on the subject is the following:
Putting aside this idea that if we could live forever would we, the only thing we know about life is that we are going to die. Thus, if we were granted this “special privilege” of living forever, every human interaction would die. Every relationship would end and why would someone want to endure all of that pain.
First up, does immortal mean you can’t die at all? Or just that you would never die of old age?
Regardless, there are 3 main things that drive a person:
- money,
- getting a good feeling from doing a task and/or from its accomplishment.
- the knowledge that we only have limited time alive and feel a sense of urgency and pressure to do things before it is no longer possible.
You would have a totally different outlook to life if u knew you would never die. You would lack a great deal of motivation, and thus probably get bored of life much quicker than mortal people. On the other hand, depending on when you found out you would never die, you might get accustomed to it before you grow to accept that you have a mortal life like everyone else and find the 2 other reasons sufficient enough.
For a person who didn’t like themselves at all, this would be horrible news. Personally I have enough trouble wanting to live much longer anyway, I’m not unhappy with who I am, I just hate the way life is in general and don’t enjoy doing it. Whether or not I was immortal.
I don’t see this obsession with age and trying to live as long as you can - being old looks crap. I’d hate to prolong it. And if I had eternal youth, things would get boring and samey in much the same way as they do to any grown up, whether or not you maintain your physical ability to do them.
Has anyone read Veronika Decides To Die by Paulo Coelho? This poses the question opposite to the one asked by Skeptic which I think proves my motivational theory.
on a sidenote, that moneything was pretty strange. it drives me to nothing.
I don’t agree with the first one. Were we not “people” before money was invented?
There are things that would continuously keep me interested in life. If I had infinate time I’d make an attempt to study them all. Drastic changes in life occur often enough to keep the mind interested. Advancements in technology even logic changes.
But assume if you have an infinite future then you have an infinite past to investigate.
Another huge problem I have with a limited life span is the progress certain people would have made had they lived longer. What developments would great thinkers of the past bring up had they had enough time to think on them?
I think it would open enough doors. But then again I’ve never done it.
Another way to look at it is this. I said I’ve never done it. I’ve grown to accept that I never have and never will. If you live for ever you’ll never die. You’d eventually grow to accept it. I think the positives and negatives would balance to a point. A certain degree of preference might throw it off though.
What drives ppl to do jobs they hate then? They just do it for the money.
Sure this is a modern day thing and we are still ppl without money. But I was just putting it in modern day context.
Immortality, in this body, on this planet? No. In another dimension, higher state of conciousness, etc.? Yes.
I know it’s likely that I don’t hold to the most popular position on this webboard, but being a conservative Anglican, I believe in the immortality of the soul. I recognize that this discussion is focused on the prospect of physical immortality via purely natural means, but I dispute this assumption and thus seek to refocus the discussion to the concept of immortality in general. This, for me, is advantageous in a few ways: firstly, it illumines the possibility of work for the immortal. I believe that any work or action by a human endowed with immortality ought to be external, in that it should focus on something external to itself. I believe that the fulfillment of human worship, where worship is designed as a ‘posture of life’ where all faculties, aims, and abilities are given to the specific task of reverence and obedience to God. The fulfillment, legitimacy, and satisfaction that would be derived from such ‘right living’ would, it seems to me, to be eternal, and thus it therein eliminates the possibility of the aforementioned boredom that invades the more materialistic perspectives. If you have any questions, I’d be happy to elaborate on my position.
I am definately materialistic. I have aquired that from my upbringing. To me, something like the soul seems like something that was made up to explain what we still don’t know about what is the fundamental ingredient of life. I need to perceive something through sensory means or to assume something through logic based on these perceptions to believe it. I think the only immortal thing is DNA. And so TdB is correct about what influences my stand point on this subject.
However, had I acquired a strong belief in something such as that of the soul or something religious that made my life seem more happy and hopeful, I am sure that I would change my answer to the poll question.
Another state of mind that would change my perspective would be that of a fly or something similar - completely unaware of my presense, not needing emotions only instructions from my instincts, and thus has nothing to even hint of raising this question, only instincts. Ignorance is bliss. Or more accurately, ignorance is without “unbliss”.
Any person who still believes that they would live their life to the fullest forever without any strong belief is merely not as bored of doing the same things over and over that only comes with age and experience once ones limitations are discovered.
I think it is naive to assume that living in a higher state of consciousness, being superhuman in some way and or living in a better place would soley be a sufficient enough way to change their opinion on life unless you had infinite and limitless abilities.
A bird does not appreciate its ability to fly, nor a fish to swim. It is how it is and has always been and does not know any different. Had you been superhuman, you may revel in your superiority to others like you and enjoy helping them in ways that they are unable to help themselves, but your abilities would not provide any more stimulation in themselves than walking. However most humans are more able than others in some ways and would enjoy the same feeling but for a different and familiar way.
The only way you could appreciate these abilities in themselves is to aquire them after a period of acceptance that you dont have them and desire them. And so the main deciding factor of your answer the this threads question would be down to your beliefs in the same way as an average human.
do jobs they hate: can’t see any alternative. but we do have people who don’t have a job…
Money is a means of satisfying our drives, not a drive in itself. Does anyone want money for it’s own sake? Or do they want it for the things they can buy with it?
Doesn’t mean they don’t want money or more than dole money so they can have a better standard of living.
I’d say most people want money for the things that they can buy with it. Thats the only thing that you can do with money really - other than for a minority of people, keeping it because they like it provides a drive for acquiring it. But by saying just ‘money’ in general is motivational, I cover both applications of money. So I think its a valid motivational drive.
Money may seem as a motivational drive for some people. I’ll agree with that…
If you’re not motivated by money, you have enough.
Perhaps comfort or material wealth would be a better term to use then. Or power, since that’s what money gives you.