Is eternal life here?

[which doctor]

Check out these mice that are able to regrow body parts and even vital organs. They were discovered accidently and are said to be very promising. If your body is constantly regrowing itself like these mice then we may never die of natural causes. But the question is would you want to live forever? Of course you could always run in front of a moving bus and kill yourself.

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,6...tw=wn_tophead_1 (http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,68962,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1)

[Gnosis]

To live forever is to be forever dying.

[Led Zeppelin]

Yes, I would.

[Lord Testicles]

No i think ill get bored and anyway if thing dont change (campitalism i mean) they'll just make you work longer

[Forward Union]

I say yes, so long as I can kill myself. I mean, sure I could live forever, and take part in the revolution and check out and take part in the new society. And wait for space exploration to become as common as taking the bus. I could teach people what it was like thousands of years ago, and then, when I get really bored I could kill myself.

If I was also indestructible then I'd fill my time by floating about in space...try and drift into another Galaxy :lol: I have plenty of time!

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

While regeneration is not enough to grant you true immortality (Remove enough vital organs and you will die before regenerating) It will enable you to live for much longer barring accident by allowing irreplaceable organs (Brain, heart, digestive tract) to heal.

Yeah, sure I would take it. Immortality is not the same as invincibility - you can still be killed, you just won't age.

[tantric]

increased longevity + no population control = malthusian hell

will only the rich get this? of course. what else is new. longevity technology is very dangerous. the human race is not mature enough to use it properly - witness what we have done with the extended lives we already have. consider: in the last 100yrs, has the global per capita of human suffering (from disease, age, deprivation and infirmity) decreased? it has for some places, but others have gone from fairly stable agarian or hunter-gatherer societies to quasi-industrial overpopulated famine ridden hells.

technology has the potential for lessening human suffering, but so long as it is tied to capitalism, it will only exploit it.

as for me, i will do whatever i can to continue to be of service to humanity. then a few years of retirement, then i go. but who can say they will turn down a second chance when death comes for them? better people than i....

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Uh the pill doesn't exist, except as a hypothetical. And being immortal kind of removes the point of having children.

[tantric]

yeah, but those mice are patented organisms. better bet they are. and every TINY bit of science that is done in relation to this is being patented step by step. and people have children for many reasons, including because of God. would the vatican oppose such technology? it's possible, it is a violation of God's ™ law/will, i'd think.

http://www.nels.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GURPS/THS/TSA_logo/TSA.gif

[Xvall]

Since you stated that I would be able to kill myself when I wanted to, yes - absolutely.

[Xvall]

What symbol is that, by the way? And I think that this was mainly a hypothetical question regarding yourself as an individual and not whether the pill would be distributed to society as a whole.

[barret]

I think the real problem with eternal life pills would be that the population of the world would go way out of control. Everyone would be living past their 100's while people would still have children. If anything it would probably be the worst thing for the world.

[KC]

yeah, but those mice are patented organisms. better bet they are. and every TINY bit of science that is done in relation to this is being patented step by step.

Living organisms cannot be patented.


And people have children for many reasons, including because of God. would the vatican oppose such technology? it's possible, it is a violation of God's ™ law/will, i'd think.

So what?

[poster_child]

Living organisms cannot be patented.


Sadly enough, they can. I know that certain bacteria are, among others. It's ridiculous, because it puts barriers on research. Information and knowledge should be free to everyone to use.

But, I would definately say no. "Death gives meaning to our lives and gives us a sense of importance of time. If death were to be indefinately put off, time would become meaningless."

-Our Lady Peace

This is my take on things.

The environmental impact has to be addressed also. The planet could not sustain all these people. It interupts the natural course of things. Also, think about it- imagine if people like Hitler never died?

[tantric]

organisms are patented all the time. you don't even have to have the complete genome. glofish ™ come to mind - gengineered aquarium fish. the name is trademarked, the fish are patented.

Glofish ™ page (http://www.glofish.com/)

the hammer and helix is the proposed symbol of the still nascent philosophy of infosocialism, which opposes all kinds of limits to the free distribution of information, especially the idea of patenting organisms or genomes. the helix is DNA, in the act of splitting and thus replicating.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 01:17 AM
I think the real problem with eternal life pills would be that the population of the world would go way out of control. Everyone would be living past their 100's while people would still have children. If anything it would probably be the worst thing for the world.
So why is that the countries with the longest life expectancies also tend to have low or even negative birthrates?

I think an immortality pill would see birth rates drop like a stone.

[poster_child]

So why is that the countries with the longest life expectancies also tend to have low or even negative birthrates?


This is true because in these countries, the family structure is completely different. The women are educated more so than other nations, and they work outside the home. Families in the so-called first world are smaller because of the cost of rasing children is high- clothes, food, college, i-pods etc. These countires (Canada, Japan, etc.) also have the best health care systems, and are living longer. It has nothing to do with the fact that people live to be older.

[Che NJ]

I wouldn't do it, I don't think i'd have the guts to kill myself after a while.

[Black Dagger]

Of course! But only if those that i loved could join me. There's so many things that i want to learn, see, do in life, experiences to have, it would be great to have so much to do it in. And what could be better for a communist? Think of the kind of knowledge/experience that one could accumulate, as long as your brain held up, you would become an excellent source of information/experience for generations.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 03:37 PM
Since you stated that I would be able to kill myself when I wanted to, yes - absolutely.
I agree but I don't see how this could really keep you alive forever. I was under the impression that organisms (such as humans) have an internal (genetic?) clock that ticks down and you eventually die; though this would obviously make people live much longer.

[Zapata's Ghost]

Why would I want to witness the downfall of mankind? I'd rather die in my own time than die in someone else's.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Zapata's [email protected] 3 2005, 10:22 AM
Why would I want to witness the downfall of mankind?
Perhaps you could make a difference or have you defeated yourself already?


I'd rather die in my own time than die in someone else's.

Death is death; your own time is when you die, so you could have no time.

[Xvall]

Why would I want to witness the downfall of mankind?

Because you would be the sole entity that would get to see it all unravel! Think abiout it, friend!

[Zingu]

I rather would have my brain uploaded to a computer harddrive, or have an disembodied brain suspended in some perserving liquid ever thinking rather than this pill/

[Latifa]

Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 05:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
Mainly due to the aging process. I would assume this pill would halt or even reverse it.


I rather would have my brain uploaded to a computer harddrive, or have an disembodied brain suspended in some perserving liquid ever thinking rather than this pill/

Well, you'd take up less room :lol: But seriously, unless you expect to download yourself into a new body, I suspect it would either be very traumatic or very boring.

[Che NJ]

Well, you'd take up less room But seriously, unless you expect to download yourself into a new body, I suspect it would either be very traumatic or very boring.

No Way, you could like, live inside of video games :D . But I guess you would have to get new games every month or so <_< .

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by NoXion+Oct 4 2005, 05:40 AM--> (NoXion @ Oct 4 2005, 05:40 AM)
[email protected] 4 2005, 05:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
Mainly due to the aging process. I would assume this pill would halt or even reverse it. [/b]
I see no reason to believe that (refer to my earlier post).

[Dark Exodus]

They have found a real, non-hypothetical drug that changes certain genes (that are present in some form in almost every species) resulting in a 66% increase in lifespan.


Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 08:26 PM
yeah, but those mice are patented organisms. better bet they are. and every TINY bit of science that is done in relation to this is being patented step by step. and people have children for many reasons, including because of God. would the vatican oppose such technology? it&#39;s possible, it is a violation of God&#39;s ™ law/will, i&#39;d think.

http://www.nels.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GURPS/THS/TSA_logo/TSA.gif
Patents have to expire. Besides most of the costs of drugs are in research, a black market would form if it was made illegal. Just like abortions and alcohol.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Dark [email protected] 4 2005, 09:31 AM
They have found a real, non-hypothetical drug that changes certain genes (that are present in some form in almost every species) resulting in a 66% increase in lifespan.
That would put me on my way. Hook me up; I need enough for my loved ones ;)

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 12:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
The body regenerates itself so you don&#39;t age.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Fist of Blood+Oct 4 2005, 03:36 PM--> (Fist of Blood @ Oct 4 2005, 03:36 PM)
[email protected] 4 2005, 12:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
The body regenerates itself so you don&#39;t age. [/b]
Not as far as I know. The body slows/stops regenerating because of age. If regeneration counteracted age, people with better cell regeneration would age slower.

[I Watch The Watchers]

I certainly hope we never enter a world in which this question is directly relevant. The option to become immortal would divide humanity among very strange lines. People who believe in an after life superior to this one would tend away from it. I think anyone who wanted children would have to avoid the option to avoid an even grater population boom. I could also see opposition to convicted criminals living forever, especially if it&#39;s thought that they may re-offend. And imagine applying for a job when the competition has a hundred times your experience and will never be less physically capable then they are at that moment.

[Black Dagger]

And imagine applying for a job when the competition has a hundred times your experience and will never be less physically capable then they are at that moment.

Well hopefully by the time of this hypothetical we will be living in a communist society, where we wont have to compete for wages to survive ;)

[Latifa]

Originally posted by NoXion+Oct 4 2005, 11:50 PM--> (NoXion @ Oct 4 2005, 11:50 PM)
[email protected] 4 2005, 05:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
Mainly due to the aging process. I would assume this pill would halt or even reverse it. [/b]
The aging process is caused by oxidisation, therefore if you breathe, you age. Very simple. I don&#39;t know how a pill could prevent this process.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Latifa+Oct 13 2005, 12:35 AM--> (Latifa @ Oct 13 2005, 12:35 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 11:50 PM

[email protected] 4 2005, 05:36 AM
Look how crap and inefficient the human body is at 80. Imagine it after 180 years? No way.
Mainly due to the aging process. I would assume this pill would halt or even reverse it.
The aging process is caused by oxidisation, therefore if you breathe, you age. Very simple. I don&#39;t know how a pill could prevent this process. [/b]
Very simply; the body heals the damage from the free radicals.

Yet no one addresses my question... Isn&#39;t there some sort of genetic trigger for aging?

[drain.you]

I meant to vote no in the poll but accidently clicked the View Results button, d&#39;oh :| lol

[Hate Is Art]

No. What would be the point, imagine how boring it would become. The same things day after day. I&#39;d rather die at 27 then 67.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by Digital [email protected] 17 2005, 07:35 PM
No. What would be the point, imagine how boring it would become. The same things day after day. I&#39;d rather die at 27 then 67.
Actually, if I was 200 years old today, the last two centuries would be anything but boring.

I&#39;d love to see where society goes 200 years from now...

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 01:42 AM


Living organisms cannot be patented.


Sadly enough, they can. I know that certain bacteria are, among others. It&#39;s ridiculous, because it puts barriers on research. Information and knowledge should be free to everyone to use.

But, I would definately say no. "Death gives meaning to our lives and gives us a sense of importance of time. If death were to be indefinately put off, time would become meaningless."

-Our Lady Peace

This is my take on things.

The environmental impact has to be addressed also. The planet could not sustain all these people. It interupts the natural course of things. Also, think about it- imagine if people like Hitler never died?
1) That was a pretty good CD, aside from "Life". That song was the beginning of the end of Good OLP

2)Death doesn&#39;t give "meaning" to life. Death gives urgency to life. There&#39;s a difference.

Let me demonstrate.

What&#39;s the meaning of life? How does death alter this?


EDIT: Ya, I&#39;d take the pill, then start my own religion, with me as the messiah. The prime recruiting ground would be my "Introduction to Politics" class.

[ComradeOm]

As much as it would screw up the world I have to admit that I wouldn&#39;t mind living for a couple thousand years. Even 500 would be nice :cool:

As it is I&#39;ll probably get the worst of global warming/economic crashes/terrorism in the years to come anyway. Still, it would be nice to actually see communism.

[TC]

About the population control thing...the issue with population control has never been that people take up too much space and its never been that agriculture can&#39;t produce enough foods its always been that existing food is ineffecently distributed. Presumably any effective anti-aging technology would only be used in technologically sophisticated countries that already have far more food then they need to consume...and use it far less efficently then it could be (like in feeding grain to cattle and eating the cows instead of just eating the grain itself). So really i think it would be irrelevant...

Also if anyone seriously wants to extend their maximum life span, calorie restirction is probably the only practical way, though obviously any expected results would be much more modest...of course the diet it would require might make you think life was less worth living :-p.

[STI]

I&#39;m not worried about food, we&#39;ll just have to invent better GMOs.

[apathy maybe]

Who wants to live forever?
Who waits forever anyway?

So long as I could kill my self relativly easily, sure why not.

[Arca]

I&#39;d sure as hell want this. Screw morals and boredom, if I had a chance of never dying I&#39;d take it in a second. I&#39;d hope my family could do it too.


Originally posted by STI
EDIT: Ya, I&#39;d take the pill, then start my own religion, with me as the messiah. The prime recruiting ground would be my "Introduction to Politics" class.

:lol:

[red_orchestra]

....no, I don&#39;t think so.

[eyedrop]

Very simply; the body heals the damage from the free radicals.

Yet no one addresses my question... Isn&#39;t there some sort of genetic trigger for aging?


I read a science article which was about something around what you are asking for.

They claimed to have found that cells has a string together with it&#39;s DNA (I don&#39;t remember what it was) and everytime a cell divides itself and creates 2 cells the string in both of the cells ends up a little bit shorter than it originally was. If they are right about it then the cells can&#39;t split up anymore after they have used up their string. Then we will age as the cells can reproduce anymore, every dead cell won&#39;t have a replacement and the body wil detoriate.

If it&#39;s true then it&#39;s a genetic (if the string is a part of the DNA or whatever) aspect controlling age.




And to answer the original question: I would almost give everything to be able to find out where science will go, especially physics, and to find out where humanity would develop. I wonder how many times I have wished for a time machine so I could see the future.

[Yazman]

Yes, there is a "genetic trigger" of sorts for aging. I suggest you research something called the Hayflick Limit, that will provide your answer. Here, I&#39;ll give you a basic link, although there are many sites out there with more extensive info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayflick_Limit

*edit*

I forgot to mention; yes, I would definitely take the pill.

[anomaly]

No, I wouldn&#39;t take the pill. Although some of you are stubbornly atheist, I am not. I don&#39;t know what lies beyond this world, and I want to find out. Death almost seems exciting. What&#39;s the worst it could be, eternal darkness? In the immortal words of Captain Hook, "Death is the only adventure."

[Bannockburn]

To live forever, and to live eternally are two different things. I wouldn&#39;t want to live eternally, and I don&#39;t think I would want to live forever. However, with that being said, one, and the only thing that sucks about death is that I&#39;m going to miss all the cool and not so cool developments of future progression. To know I&#39;m going to miss developments in medical, science, technology, philosophy, knowledge really sucks. In my less rational, more pragmatic days, I say, “yeah there gotta be a God who will transport me, or at least let me see all the cool things I&#39;m not experiencing". Of course, I say that as I laugh.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 11:26 PM
To live forever, and to live eternally are two different things. I wouldn&#39;t want to live eternally, and I don&#39;t think I would want to live forever. However, with that being said, one, and the only thing that sucks about death is that I&#39;m going to miss all the cool and not so cool developments of future progression. To know I&#39;m going to miss developments in medical, science, technology, philosophy, knowledge really sucks. In my less rational, more pragmatic days, I say, “yeah there gotta be a God who will transport me, or at least let me see all the cool things I&#39;m not experiencing". Of course, I say that as I laugh.
Do you mind explaning to me what the difference between forever and eternal?

[Bannockburn]

Yeah, sure no problem. Traditionally, Eternal is a state which is outside both time and space. We usually give this to God, or for Plato the forms. Forever on the other hand is generally regarded as a state within time and space which is regarded as permanent.

[Postteen]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 22 2005, 07:54 AM
So long as I could kill my self relativly easily, sure why not.
I agree.


I would chose to live as long as i wanted, and when I&#39;d get bored or tired I&#39;d kill myself.There are so many things i want to see and do, that a life of (maximum i say, without an accident) 75 years cant give me.

[TheComrade]

I would be interested in seeing the world 1000 years from now but I think that the mind would get tired - not just the body. THe mind would want to be free of physical restrictions....you would go insane in other words. Besides, you would have to witness all the misery, pain and torment of a million lives&#33;&#33;

[Jacob]

No, I don&#39;t think I would, I&#39;d be so bored...

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 09:39 AM
No, I don&#39;t think I would, I&#39;d be so bored...
Bored, bored?&#33;?&#33; I think the next century or two is going to be one of the most important periods of time ever. Granted I could kill myself if I wanted to of course I would want to live forever.

[TheComrade]

As I have said - your mind gets old, you become tired of the physical bounds of the body... Life is essentially, slow, living does become boring that why many people feel that there time is at an end, even if they are not ill.

[our_mutual_friend]

You may not have considered dying, or wanting to die, but it is an inevitability, until someone creates this wonder pill, but how long will it be before someone actually gets round to creating it? And how would this person be regarded? As a saviour of mankind or as some meddler who will destroy it?

Greek myth of Odyssius (or Ulysses) and the reason he was trapped on the island of Circe for *blank* amount of years was because she was bored and wanted a companion (and a sex slave, but thats beside the point). But she was a demi-goddess and she was BORED.

Next 100 years might be amazing. Or there might be a similar level of progress as there has been over the past 100 years. It would just seem as though it is more amazing because we have seen the progress of mankind up until this point and we are greedy enough to want to see the future before it has become the present.

Would immortality be the suspension of the body or the continuous aging of an ageless body? - ew to that. I wouldnt want a perfectly funtioning mind in a dilapidated body. It would be more beneficial to harness the soul, spirit or whatever it is and the thoughts that people have and pass them to a future generation, rather than a gift of a world that wouldnt be able to sustain the immortality of this generation and of future generations as well as new people. No need for reproduction if immortality is around.

I think we&#39;re better off sticking to what is natural for us, rather than messing aruond with what can or could damage the future survival of the vastly superior *coughs ever so slightly* human race.

[TheComrade]

I think it strange that so many of you think of immortality as a physical thing - that you actually have to be living. Why can&#39;t you live forever in memory? Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky - all the Russian Revolutionaries - will live forever, they will never be forgotten. Dickens is immortal - is body is dead but his life, his soul lives on in his work. If you have/do have children - you shall be remembered - and in the nicest way possible...

[Dark Exodus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 10:17 PM
I think it strange that so many of you think of immortality as a physical thing - that you actually have to be living. Why can&#39;t you live forever in memory? Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky - all the Russian Revolutionaries - will live forever, they will never be forgotten. Dickens is immortal - is body is dead but his life, his soul lives on in his work. If you have/do have children - you shall be remembered - and in the nicest way possible...
Yes, but that is not what this topic is about. Re-read the original post.

[TheComrade]

Dark Exodus - actually Dark Exodus, it was a counter argument to those who argue about living forever - it was a subtle way of saying its totally unnecessary. Re-read my post.

[Atlas Swallowed]

No, I would offer it to my son.

[Dark Exodus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 07:26 PM
Dark Exodus - actually Dark Exodus, it was a counter argument to those who argue about living forever - it was a subtle way of saying its totally unnecessary. Re-read my post.
I see. In that case it depends on your definition of living forever.
Dickens may live forever, or close to it, but that does not mean he will be able to experience the take-off of a 747. He will, for his own conciousness sake still have lived in his own time.
I see where you are coming from though.

[TheComrade]

Dark Exodus - phew, I get scared when people directly challenge me - RevLeft can be very intimidating seeing as many of you appear to me incredibly smart and knowledgable....

This is the difference between a spirtutal person and a scientific person - science says life is all about electrical impulses - movments, breathing etc. A spiritual person might say everyone lives forever in memory - in text, archives and so forth.

What would everyone define living forever as?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Since "living forever" is a physical impossibility, I would say that the closest one could get to immortality is living until the heat death of the universe.

Leaving behind books, theories, monuments etc is all well and good, but that&#39;s not living forever, that&#39;s leaving a legacy.

[Xvall]

A legacy that will one day deteriorate and be forgotten, no less.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 05:12 AM
A legacy that will one day deteriorate and be forgotten, no less.
Indeed. Who remembers the inventor of that most important invention, the wheel?

[Xvall]

A good point indeed.

[Seeker]

Eternal life? No thanks. Life = suffering.

An end to ageing? Sure, sign me up.

I would not want to be stuck in this shithole forever, but so long as I could die if I so chose, I&#39;d take the pill.