• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Metabiological Ethics: Attitudes to Death


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 15 October 2004 - 07:20 AM


October 5, 2004

Dear Sirs,

My name is Ilia Stambler. I am a Russian-born Israeli. I have an MA in English literature (Bar Ilan University, Israel) and background in biology (Haifa Institute of Technology, Israel). I am employed as a scientific writer/translator at the Biophysical Interdisciplinary Schottenstein Center for the Research and the Technology of the Cellome, Physics Department, Bar Ilan University. Concurrently I am writing a PhD thesis on attitudes to immortality in English literature (English Department, Bar Ilan University). I believe that immortality is good and possible. I have recently joined the Immortality Institute and would be honored to participate in the movement.


Attached please find the essay entitled “Metabiological Ethics: Attitudes to Death and Immortality in Some Works of Classical Literature” which I would like to submit for publication in the Immortality Institute book project.







I thank you for your consideration

Sincerely yours,
Ilia Stambler
Harashba St. 12/21, Rishon Lezion, Israel
Tel: 972-3-9614296
Email: istambler@hotmail.com

#2 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 15 October 2004 - 07:21 AM

UPLOADED: http://www.imminst.o...ges/stamlit.doc

Metabiological Ethics: Attitudes to Death and Immortality in Some Works of Classical Literature


“The Association of Riflemen declared death to be a good thing.”
“I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work – I want to
achieve it through not dying.”

Woody Allen

Metabiology is a vast and not thoroughly researched subject. The term may be understood to mean not just a language or system of evaluation outside and descriptive of biology, and not a realm “beyond” biology, but rather thematics adjacent to, “near” biology. Generally, the subject of metabiology may involve an examination of how biological constructs, or the notions of living matter, bear on other aspects of culture (and vice versa). Among the major metabiological concerns are epistemology and workings of the mind, inasmuch as mind and knowledge are affected by the biology of the brain and of the entire body (a concept expressed in Aristotle’s Physiognomics and unrefuted ever since).[ ] Categorization being one of the chief mental faculties, it might be interesting to trace how categorization and taxonomy have operated from Classical to Modern times, say, from Aristotle (384-322 BC) and Plinius Major (23-79 AD) to Carl Linné (1707-1778), Alfred Brehm (1829-1884), and Charles Darwin (1809-1882): Aristotelian grouping into categories may have a parallel in Linné’s nomenclature, whereas Plinius’ approach, describing each phenomenon ‘as is’, may be similar to that of Brehm. It may be also worth researching how the notions of evolution have influenced taxonomy (or ‘static’ categories).
Sociology is also largely metabiological. The notions of race and breed are perhaps the earliest examples of socially applied biological concepts. In modernity, hierarchy and collectivism, found in the animal world, are often transposed onto human relations. For example, the Nietzschean metabiological model (Will to Power, 1889-1900) [ ], emphasizing competition and assimilation (“digestion”) of the environment by an individual, can be contrasted to the collectivist, “hive” model of Lev Tolstoy (War and Peace, 1863-1869) [ ] and Peter Kropotkin (Anarchy, 1902) [ ]. Metabiological concepts often have far-reaching political implications, as seen in such controversies as meliorism vs. Malthusianism, eugenics vs. behaviorism, Lamarckism vs. Darwinism – to go no further.
This work will focus on the ethical aspect of metabiology, i.e. the valuation of life and its preservation. An emphasis will be placed on examining the radical forms of life valuation: “prolongevitism’ (a term coined by Gerald Gruman, 1966) [ ] or the pursuit of immortality. It should be noted that immortality here means “physical immortality” or simply “the absence of biological death,” to distinguish it from other invented compensational kinds of immortality, such as afterlife, fame and contribution.
There seems to be a four-pronged choice of attitudes toward maximal prolongation of life and immortality. These are either possible and desirable, possible and undesirable, impossible and desirable, or impossible and undesirable. Arguments for or against immortality apply also to maximal prolongation of life, because when life is valued above all, the desire to maximally extend it, and ultimately, the desire for immortality are logical outcomes. Similarly, once the possibility of extending life beyond some (always arbitrarily set) limit is granted, the limits may be pushed indefinitely. (Mechnikov, though, argues that it may be desirable to extend life to, let’s say 150, and after that limit a person apparently shouldn’t wish to live any longer. [ ] And similarly, it is often argued that it may be possible to extend life to 150, but not to 155 and so on). For psychological reasons, the “possible and desirable” are often linked, as well as the “impossible and undesirable.”
The belief that immortality is desirable but impossible (at least at the present time) is perhaps the most commonsensical, yet at the same time neurotic (dissonant, discomforting) position. I could find no outspoken literary examples of such an attitude. The Sumero-Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh (the most complete version dates from c. 650 BC, but the story originates as early as about 3000 BC) [ ] expresses it in some measure, yet I would still argue that the ancient epic advocates immortality as good and possible. It offers quite a few ways to pursue immortality. The enterprise is successful, and Gilgamesh loses immortality only by accident; Utnapishtim, on the other hand, remains immortal.
Such apologies of immortality are few. The opposite view, professing that immortality is neither possible nor desirable, seems to have been dominant. The story of Achilles’ heel, related in Arctinus’ Aethiopis (fl. c. 650 BC) [ ], emphasizes the inherent vulnerability and defectiveness of human beings that make death inevitable and even deserved. As for the desirability of death, an early assertion of it can be found in the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite (7th or 8th century BC), namely, in the famous story of Tithonus. [ ] Tithonus is granted immortality, which means for him an eternity of suffering and degeneration, and is therefore absolutely undesirable. This is an extremely influential position. The motif recurs in Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) (in the story of eternally senile Struldbruggs) [ ], in Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray (1891) (the eternal depravity) [ ], in Karel Capek’s Macropulus’ Remedy (1922) (the eternal boredom and worthlessness) [ ] and in Arkady and Boris Strugatzky’s Five Spoons of Elixir (1966) (the eternity of evil-doing) [ ]. The idea that prolonging life means prolonging suffering, and therefore that death is welcome, reappears in the pessimistic philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer (The World as Will and Idea, 1844) [ ] and Eduard Hartmann (The Philosophy of the Unconscious, 1870) [ ], and even in the notion of the “Death Wish”, in Freud’s We and Death (1915) [ ] and Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920) [ ]. Notably, in this line of thought, it is never believed that immortality is possible. The supposition of immortality is just a rhetorical move designed to show that even if it were possible, it would be horrible. Such rhetoric is implied in the structure of the myth of Tithonus: Anchises asks his lover Aphrodite for immortality; she justifies her refusal by relating the story of Tithonus forever suffering, as if to say “see how benign it is that you die.”
The notion of death as both inevitable and welcome can be found in Homer’s Iliad (8th or 9th century BC). [ ] In the heroic epic, life does not seem to be of much value. Ferocious battle and death with honor are valorized. In the world of heroes, death is not to be feared. In the Odyssey (c. 8th century BC) [ ] too, the preservation of life is not the chief concern. The death of a hero might be somewhat significant and regretful, but not of the “little people”: Odysseus’ companions or the suitors that he slaughters. The spectacles of death (of the kind shown in the Iliad or Odyssey, Book XXII) have remained popular and attractive ever since. When Odysseus is offered eternal youth by Circe (Book X), he turns it down. The apparent reason for the rejection is the love of Penelope and home-sickness (or perhaps the fear of eternal boredom). It is suggested that the perils of a heroic quest are to be preferred over eternal peaceful idleness, and therefore refusing immortality is the right thing to do.
Further abating the fear of death is the notion of the afterlife. Odysseus knows of its existence for a fact, he personally visits the underworld (Book XI). In Homer’s vision of the afterlife (similar to that of other primeval religions), the spirits are clearly material beings, though perhaps made of a thinner, more ethereal matter: Hades is a remote place on Earth (as also the Elysium), the spirits live in a material environment (with rivers and trees), they are perceivable by the living, they affect and are affected by physical objects (attracted to blood or repelled by cold metal). The afterlife of pure forms or ideal souls wasn’t perhaps invented until Plato.
The concept of afterlife solves the problem of death and immortality by suggesting that there is in fact no death, that one’s essence (though strikingly dissimilar to the present embodied state) survives. Paradoxically, an acceptance of life’s finality can be equally soothing: there is just nothing we can do to prevent death and therefore should not worry about it. Mechnikov (On the Nature of Man, 1903) [ ] calls such psychological reconciliation to death “smirenie,” which can be translated as “resignation”, “appeasement” or a “tranquilized state.” A variety of (often contradictory) ideations and practices can lead to such a sedated state of mind. For example, the philosophical rhetoric of Cicero’s De senectute (c. 65 BC) [ ] is especially designed to show that old age and even death are nothing to be afraid of and can actually be good for you. Though strikingly different in method, the objectives of samadhi and nirvana seem to be the same appeasement in the face of death. [ ] The tranquility can be, though, much more easily achieved by just ignoring and repressing thoughts of death and by placing a taboo on the very words “death” and “immortality.”
Both the tranquil resignation to the finality of death and happiness at the prospect of an afterlife are present in Socrates’ reasoning on the eve of his execution, or rather suicide (Plato, The Apology of Socrates) [ ]:
Let us reflect in another way, and we shall see that there is great reason to hope that
death is a good; for one of two things – either death is a state of nothingness and
utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a change and migration of the soul
from this world to another. Now if you suppose that there is no consciousness, but a
sleep like the sleep of him who is undisturbed even by dreams, death will be an
unspeakable gain. ... But if death is the journey to another place, and there, as men
say, all the dead abide, what good, O my friends and judges, can be greater than
this? ... Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again.

With either option in mind, Socrates is prepared to calmly and readily die.
After Socrates, philosophers often prefer one of the two alternatives. Plato (427-347 BC) – or Socrates (469 –399 BC) in Plato’s corpus – seem to opt for the afterlife (also known as immortality of the ideal soul). For example, Plato’s Phaedo makes a case for the afterlife, employing the arguments of recollection (the soul is said to recollect former existence and therefore must have had former existence), cyclicality (death follows life, therefore life must follow death), affinity (the soul is of the unchangeable forms, and is therefore unchangeable), and finally the somewhat tautological argument of the rejection of death (the soul is immortal because it does not admit death). It is concluded, “beyond all doubt then, soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls really will exist in Hades”. [ ] In the “Allegory of the Cave” (The Republic, Book VII) [ ], Plato seems to employ a perceptual stratagem to bring home the notion of the soul’s immortality: if we believe that we can cast shadows, we can be also made to believe that the pure form, indestructible shadows can cast us, that shadows of the other realm constitute our essence.
Plato’s idealism can be contrasted with Epicurus’ (342 – 270 BC) ’thick’, atomistic materialism, implying an utter and final disintegration upon death. Epicurus’ resignation to the finality of death is complete:
Become accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all good and evil
consists in sensation, but death is deprivation of sensation. And therefore a right
understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable,
not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the
craving for immortality. … So death, the most terrifying of ills, is nothing to us,
since so long as we exist, death is not with us; but when death comes, then we do
not exist.
(Letter to Menoeceus) [ ].

According to Epicurus, a person must live in “fullness of pleasure” and not worry about death: “The wise man neither seeks to escape life nor fears the cessation of life, for neither does life offend him nor does the absence of life seem to be any evil” [ ].
Aristotle (384-322 BC) seems to present a border case (also chronologically) between Plato’s idealism and Epicurus’ thick materialism. Aristotle’s position may be termed ’thin’ materialism. Aristotle was a great biologist and cherished life in all its forms. In Parva Naturalia, in the treatises On Length and Shortness of Life [ ] and On Youth and Old Age. On Life and Death [ ], Aristotle carefully investigates the possible causes of longevity and mortality. His method in doing so is not much different from that of modern comparative gerontology. Since Aristotle, biological knowledge has been enlisted in the service of life preservation and prolongation. However, in the treatise On Length and Shortness of Life, Aristotle states the inevitable destructibility of the body, for every physical entity composed of opposite and conflicting elements is fated for destruction. The soul, however, is indestructible. But it is not the ideal Platonic soul. It is a kind of matter, though an infinitely thin matter. The soul is constituted by σύμυτον πνeυμα analogous to ether, the fifth element, which is not subject to a conflict of elements, and is therefore indestructible. It is the same substance the Sun and higher spheres are made of (cf. On the Heavens, Physics, and On the Soul). [ , , , ] Aristotle is very inclusive, and in many respects close to life-extensionism. Yet, he ultimately denies the possibility of physical immortality. Even though the “pneuma” is hardly destructible, it does not constitute the entirety of human being.
The Metamorphoses (8 AD) by Ovid (43 BC – 17 AD) [ ] provides perhaps the most inclusive and eclectic collection of arguments against immortality, whose impact may be still felt. Yet, it contains quite a few pro-immortality passages as well. Ovid’s position may be described as ’anything goes’ with a slight bend toward apologetics of death. Ovid claims a poet’s immortality through his immortal work (a thought earlier expressed by Theognis, 5th century BC) [ ]. To the present time, this seems to be the most popular form of symbolic immortality. Ovid reiterates the Tithonus model of the ’forever suffering’ immortal human. In Ovid’s version (Book XIV), it is the Sibyl who is doomed to an eternity of senescence and misery (in her bargain with the gods, she too forgot to ask for eternal youth).
Ovid recalls the story of Medea who possessed the skill of rejuvenation (Book VII). In the Medea tradition, the sorceress uses her skill both for good (when she rejuvenates Jason’s father Aeson) and for evil (when she, by a show of medical skill, tricks Pelias’ daughters into killing their father). The evil outcome of her power is however emphasized. Most ancient sources mention only the murder of Pelias, with no reference to the rejuvenation of Aeson. Such, for example, are Euripides’ Medea (431 BC) [ ], Apollodorus’ Library (c. 140?, the most comprehensive surviving collection of Greek mythology) [ ], and Pausanias’ Description of Greece (c. 143-176 AD) [ ]. Sir James George Frazer names only the lost Nostoi (Returns, attributed to Stesichorus, 632 – 552 BC) and Ovid’s Metamorphoses as sources explicitly mentioning the rejuvenation of Aeson. [ ] But in Ovid too, Medea (regardless of her motives) acts as a murderous witch. The use of medical skill, of the power of healing, rejuvenation and resuscitation for evil, has remained a popular motif. It can be found in Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley's Frankenstein: or, the Modern Prometheus (1818) [ ], and in countless other works of science fiction (the ‘mad/evil professor’ theme). Moreover, it is suggested that the power to confer immortality and immortality itself necessarily are social evils. When such power is possessed, a gap opens between the immortal and the rest of mortal ‘slobs’. The status quo is threatened. Immortality is perceived as unnatural, and the immortal as a monster. The monster maintains its life, but takes the lives of others, and must therefore be destroyed. This is the theme of Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897). [ ] Again, a list of science fiction/fantasy books and movies employing this sujet can take up pages. (These include the so popular J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, 1997, where not only is the monster destroyed, but the immortality-conferring Philosopher’s Stone is destroyed as well, for safety. [ ] )
Another example in the tradition of turning an immortal into a bogeyman is the Russian folk-tale "Koshey the Immortal". [ ] Koshey is demonized and hunted down for no apparent reason except for his longevity (that is, being out of the rank). His another fault is taking a bride. Immortality is often assumed to be antagonistic to normal breeding; in other words, mortality is viewed as good and necessary for sex and reproduction – another trick up the sleeve of death apologetic, anti-immortalist fiction. The rationale behind this assumption might be bio-economic. 'Koshey' means 'scrawny' or 'shriveled', that might imply extremely low energy expenditure, while all the resources are dedicated to maintaining his individual life – an attempt to reproduce leads to demise. Again, an arbitrary limit is imposed on vitality. But is it hard to imagine a higher level of vitality, which would allow one to both survive indefinitely and reproduce? Perhaps the only 'adult' book that dares envision such an (apparently commonsensical) option is Charles de Coster's The Legend of Tyl Ulenspiegel (1869) [ ]: Tyl and Nele hold on to life and immortality not 'in spite of sex', but perhaps mostly thanks to it.
The Medea/ Frankenstein/ Dracula/ Bogeyman scenario dominates in almost any treatment of immortality. The plot may be summarized as ‘kill the immortal’. This is a cogent scenario, but apparently not the only possible one. Yet, who ever tells of a beneficent immortal, or of a collective effort to achieve longevity for all? Perhaps only a few folktales: the Russian “The Apples of Youth” [ ] and “The Soldier and Death” [ ], the Chinese “Lieh Tzu” [ ] or the Bashkir “Ural Batyr” [ ]. The Bogeyman stories seem to be more appealing: they are more exciting and purge the reader/viewer of the fear of death.
In the Metamorphoses, Aesculapius, who could heal the sick and even revive the dead, is largely sympathized with (Book II). And yet, he is struck by Jove’s lightening, apparently for violating the divine order. Interestingly, in the same passage, Ocyrhoë prophesying to Aesculapius, ends her speech: “And you my father [Chiron the centaur, Aesculapius’ and Hercules’ mentor], who now are immortal, shall feel such pain ... as will make you pray for the knack of death, and Jove shall hear your prayer and cut the endless cord that binds you” [ ]. It is thus suggested that death is both a mercy which ends suffering, and a punishment for trying to prevent suffering, for healing and resuscitation (a.k.a. violating the divine/natural order). This paradox (both prongs) implies a very unequivocal, practical and soothing message: ‘death is all right, don’t try to fight it’. In Apollodorus’ version of Aesculapius’ story, “[Aesculapius] had received from Athena the blood that flowed from the veins of the Gorgon, and while he used the blood that flowed from the veins on the left side for the bane of mankind, he used the blood that flowed from the right side for salvation, and by that means he raised the dead” [ ]. Like Medea, the great master of healing uses his art (how could he not?) for the affliction of mankind. Thus, immortality (or just an ‘unreasonably’ long life) is again associated with suffering, evil-doing, and violation of the presumed will of gods.
The collection of anti-immortalist arguments found in the Metamorphoses also includes the notion of an afterlife of spirits or shadows (Book XIV), as a way of reducing the fear of death. Yet, it seems, the strongest argument employed against physical immortality lies in the idea of the “metamorphosis” itself. There is just no sense in preserving life, because there is, in Ovid, no such thing as a stable life form. Life undergoes incessant transformation: now one is a girl, the next moment a spider (Book VI). The opening part of Metamorphoses – “Bodies, I have in mind, and how they can change to assume new shapes” – reminds of Aristotle’s argument about the dynamic opposition of elements, and therefore the inevitable change and destructibility of the body. Also, there can be no preservation of personality, for there is no stable personality (or no personality at all): protagonists of the Metamorphoses change their perceptions and attitudes in a flash. There is just nothing but a constant recombination of elements. The eternal dynamic transformations, and being a part of the eternal whole, constitute, accordingly, the only real immortality. This idea reappears in Romantic pantheism. Thus, famously, Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805):
Vor dem Tode erschrickst du? Du wünschest unsterblich zu leben?
Leb im Ganzen! Wenn du lange dahin bist, es bleibt!

You’re afraid of the death and want to be ever alive?
Be part of the whole. When you die, the whole will survive! [ ]

A grotesque offshoot of such ideology can be found in Finot (quoted in Mechnicov’s On the Nature of Man): “Life goes on even in the grave, the forever renewing and transforming life” (i.e. one’s life continues in the life of worms in the grave) [ ]. Ovid’s vision of pantheistic eternal transmogrification (to the denial of a distinct sustainable self) seems to be inconsistent with his obsession with fame (or the proclamation and commemoration of individuality). Similarly, Romantic pantheism (or dissolution of personality in the eternal whole) seems to be at odds with the Romantic notion of self, with the idea of self-reliant creative genius. Apparently, after all, there are such things as personality, unique individual memories, homeostasis, or in short, a life worth preserving.
Radical advocacy of life preservation, or the belief that immortality is possible and desirable, is rather rare in Western culture (unlike the Chinese when it was dominated by Taoism [ ]). Nevertheless, the idea does occur in Greek and Roman antiquity. For example, the legendary Hyperboreans – mentioned in the Pythian Odes of Pindar (c. 518 – 438 BC) [ ], The Histories of Herodotus (484 – 425 BC) [ ], and The Natural History of Pliny the Elder (23 – 79 AD) [ ] – were said to enjoy an extremely long (virtually infinite) and happy life. The recurrent theme of return from the underworld (a feat performed by Odysseus, Hercules, Orpheus, Sisyphus, Aeneas, and Persephone) may indicate an allegory of, and perhaps even faith in the possibility of conquering death and physical resurrection. Also, Medea’s ability to rejuvenate is not always demonized:
According to Pherecydes and Simonides, she applied the magical restorative with
success to her husband, Jason. Again, Aeschylus wrote a play called The Nurses of
Dionysus, in which he related how Medea similarly renovated not only the nurses
but their husbands by the simple process of decoction. [ ]


These are early representations of the ongoing effort of alchemists, from classical to modern times, to brew the potion of immortality. The Medean cauldron of rejuvenation reappears in legends throughout the world (Celtic, Russian, Turkic). [ , , ] In Christianity, it takes the form of the Holy Grail.
The faith in the possibility of conquering death is expressed in Alcestis (438 BC) by Euripides (484-406 BC). [ ] The life wish is strongly felt in the play: the oldest and most diseased people, soldiers going to battle the next day (the very people who, according to the apologetics of death, must be happy to die) cling to life tenaciously, showing that “death wish” and “justifications of death” are perhaps overrated and not entirely sincere. In Alcestis, Hercules literally wrestles Thanatos (Death) to the ground and brings Alcestis back to life. Generally, despite his sporadic outbursts of mad rage and violence, Hercules is rather unlike other heroes who band together for manslaughter. He is much stronger and much humbler (being a slave almost all his life). His effort is devoted to fighting Death in various monstrous guises. He has many features in common with the Sumerian Gilgamesh. Eventually, Hercules defeats Death and is granted genuine immortality. [ ] Such stories reveal a strong pro-life sentiment and present maximal prolongation of life and immortality as attainable and desirable.
A similar pro-life platform can be found in Judaism. In Jewish tradition, life is the absolute value. The principle “ve hai bahem” [ ] (viz. the obligation to live by the commandments and not to die by them) is strongly emphasized. Mortality is considered to be the main tragedy following the Fall. [ ] The extreme longevity of antediluvian patriarchs is admired. In the Torah, longevity is the main prize for observing the commandments [ ] (with no reference to an afterlife). In the Tanach, the prophet Elijah attains physical immortality [ ], and Ezekiel can revive the dead [ ]. In Halachah, “tumah” (the unholiness, evil or impurity) means simply “the negation of life”, hence the prohibition of murder and of bloodshed, and the laws of “tumah ve’taharah” (or ritual purity). [ , , ] And finally, “Tchiat Hametim” (resurrection in the flesh) is among the Thirteen Articles of Faith. [ ] According to many great Rabbis (e.g. Rav Saadia Gaon 882-942, Rav Moshe ben Nachman/Nachmanides 1194-1270, and Rav Abraham Bibago 1446-1489) the resurrection is to be followed by physical immortality. [ ] In this approach, direct divine intervention is strongly relied on.
The death-defying stance emerges in various forms throughout the ages. Thus for example The Arabian Nights (16-17th century CE): “I thought to cast myself into the sea and be at rest from the woes of the world, but could not bring myself to this, for verily life is dear” [ ]. It is also famously expressed in John Donne’s “Death, thou shalt die” (1633) [ ], and Dylan Thomas’ “Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage, against the dying of the light” (1952) [ ]. The belief that longevity, and even immortality, can be achieved through perseverance and the power of will is expressed in Bernard Shaw’s Man and Superman (1903) [ ], and especially in his Back to Methuselah (1922) [ ]. Back to Methuselah is a call for public support of life preservation, for it is more likely to be achieved collectively. Shaw saw salvation – individual and social – in neo-Lamarckist biology, that is, creative evolution toward longevity (and virtual immortality) by the power of will. A more materialist life extensionist, Condorcet, in his History of the Progress of the Human Mind (1795) [ ], envisioned that extreme longevity can be achieved through the progress of medical science, requiring a massive collective support. Whatever the method may be, for a proponent of immortality, such as Shaw and Condorcet, life must be the absolute value, worth preserving by all means, and immortality would have an infinite value.
It seems that even though the achievement of immortality is perhaps not very feasible in our lifetime, the very pursuit of it is a worthy cause (which may succeed after all), with many side benefits. For one, such pursuit entails an investment in health and not in war. Such investment is bound to produce a sizable improvement in healthcare, now generally believed to be beneficial (in the Middle Ages, even short-term life extension, even fighting disease were considered problematic, almost impossible, unnatural and ungodly). Secondly, this quest encourages one to maintain one’s personality, to peacefully entertain and try to verify one’s beliefs, whatever they are, for as long as possible. [ ] Platonic idealism and Epicurean materialism can be thus pragmatically reconciled: not because both systems teach one to die easily, but because both may encourage a person to live long. In the Platonic view (for example as expounded by Maimonides, 1135-1204, in his Mishnah Commentaries) [ , ], a person has to devote his/her life to the acquisition/learning of forms in order to ‘build up’ one’s soul for the afterlife – apparently longevity provides a good opportunity for such studies and even gives a believer a better chance to be alive at the time of Resurrection. A materialist, on the other hand, would naturally desire to forestall disintegration. In addition, such a pursuit has all the benefits of “symbolic immortality”, i.e. working for a cause that will survive you. Shaw apparently did not expect to live to be 300 or forever. Yet he wrote Back to Methuselah, his “metabiological Bible” which he considered to be his highest achievement, as a contribution to the cause. He was not heeded, however. Other ‘rational’ grand plans, deprecating the value of individual life – communism and fascism – became popular. Finally, even though born of the fear of death and driven by it, the quest for immortality may eventually diminish the fear by extending life-expectancy and taking the sting out of the sense of an ending.
The death apologetic stream however still prevails in the popular mind, though it can be countered on both ethical and scientific grounds. Thus, the often prophesied scarcity of resources and social iniquity due to longevity, as well as other ‘horrors’ brought by long life, must not be seen as inevitable. On the contrary, in a society that values life and possesses high bio-medical capabilities to effect a significant life-extension, such adverse developments are rather unlikely. Science so advanced as to make life prolongation possible, will be also able to supply the needs of the growing population and prevent ‘Tithonus’ suffering’. The anticipated ‘stagnant, murderous and evil reign of immortals’ is incompatible almost by definition with the absolute, indiscriminate life valuation, progress and collectivism necessary for the very achievement of longevity. When life’s value is relativized, conditioned on physical ability or doctrine, fascism and war are looming; whereas absolute life valuation entails only healing and mutual aid. Essentially, the Tithonus model, placing the chief value on the absence of suffering, may be countered by the absolute life valuation: in Jean de La Fontaine’s words (1621-1695), “Rather suffer than die is man’s motto” [ ]. The pro-euthanasia, suicidal reasoning implied in the Tithonus’ paradigm denies us hope in the victory of life and thereby prevents us from taking action needed to actually save lives and relieve suffering. Thus, the ages old literary myths deriding and demonizing immortality, rationalizing and justifying death, “declaring death to be a good thing”, may have been downright damaging to the pursuit of life preservation.
The very short life span must not be seen as inexorable either. For many modern proponents of immortality, empirical medico-biological research holds much promise. Recent advances in the field – telomerase and “immortal” cells, SIR2 and energy metabolism restriction, longevity genes in nematodes and several plant species, cryobiology, antioxidants, melatonin, HGH and other regeneration promoters – have increased the hopefulness. In the former Soviet Union, research has been conducted on rejuvenation through bio-field effects and psycho-regulation. [ ] (Much of it has been abandoned for lack of funding.) An interesting solution was proposed by Prof. Peter Kuzmich Anochin. It is based on a combination of neo-Lamarckist inheritance and immortal germinal plasma theory, and suggests the possibility of storing information acquired during one’s life (i.e. one’s personality) and transmitting it genetically or through another physical/biological medium. [ , ] Some suggested solutions are even more unorthodox: memetics and digital personality storage and uploading, brain and other kinds of xeno-transplantation, cloning, nano-technology and molecular and genetic repair mechanisms. Presently, pro-immortality movements are beginning to organize (for example, the World Transhumanist Association, The Immortality Institute, and several lesser scale initiatives). However, as it was in the Classical times, such voices are often found to be “on the fringe” of intellectual and social discourse. Yet, their appearance may indicate that longevity and immortality may be increasingly becoming not just a scientific, biological problem, but a meta-scientific, meta-biological, ideological issue, an issue of life strategy and social attitude.

#3 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 15 October 2004 - 07:21 AM

REFERENCES

Aristotle, Physiognomics (Translated by Loveday, T. and Forster, E.S.), In: The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Edited by Barnes, Jonathan), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, vol. 1, 805a1, pg. 1237.

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Will To Power (Translated by Ludovici, Anthony; Edited by Levy, Oscar), In: The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche, vol. 14-15, Russel& Russel, New York, 1964, “Third book. The Principles of a New Valuation. II. The Will to Power in Nature. 2. The Will to Power as Life”, vol.15, pp. 123-160; and “Fourth Book. Discipline and Breeding. I. The Order of Rank. 2. The Strong and the Weak”, vol. 15, pp.298-350.

Tolstoy, Leo, War and Peace, In: Collected Works by Lev Nikolaevich
Tolstoy, vol. 4-7, Hudozhestvennaya Literatura, Moscow, 1974,”Epilogue. Part II”, pp. 303-349.

Kropotkin, Peter, Anarchy (Russian), Airis Press, Moscow, 2002, “Mutual aid as an evolutionary factor”, pp.46-115.

Gruman, Gerald, A History of Ideas about the Prolongation of Life. The Evolution of Prolongevity Hypotheses to 1800, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Volume 56 (9), Philadelphia, 1966, pg. 3.

Mechnikov, Ilia, Etudes On the Nature of Man (Russian), The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, Moscow, 1961, “Part II. Attempts to Diminish the Evil Caused by the Disharmonies of Human Nature. Ch. XI. An Introduction to the Scientific Study of Death”, pg. 231.

Gilgamesh (translated by Sandars, N.K.), In: The Norton Anthology of World
Masterpieces, Sixth Edition, Vol. 1, (Mack, Maynard, Gen. Ed.), WW Norton &
Company, New York, 1992, pp. 11-44.

Encyclopedia Britannica, CD 2000 Deluxe Edition, “Achilles”.

Hymn to Aphrodite, In: Oxford World’s Classics. The Homeric Hymns (Translated by Crudden, Michael), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, pp. 65-75.

Swift, Jonathan, Gulliver’s travels, Fine Editions Press, London, 1957, “Part III. A Voyage to Laputa. Ch. X”, pp. 163-170.

Wilde, Oscar, The Picture of Dorian Gray, Penguin Books, London, 1985.

Capek, Karel, The Makropulos Case (translated from Czech into Russian by Aksel, Tatiana), In: Karel Capek’s Plays, Gudial Press, Moscow, 1999, pp. 235-340.

Strugatzky, Arkady and Strugatzky, Boris, Five Spoons of Elixir (Russian), Terra Fantastica, Saint Petersburg, 2001, pp.195-276.

Schopenhauer, Arthur, The World as Will and Idea (Translted by Haldane, R. B. and Kemp, J.), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1964.

Hartmann, Eduard, The Philosophy of the Unconscious: Speculative Results According to the Inductive Method of Physical Science (Translated by Coupland, William Chatterton), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1931.

Freud, Sigmund, Wir und der Tod, Republished in: Die Zeit, Issue 30, 1990.

Freud, Sigmund, Beyond the Pleasure Principle (Translated by Strachey, James), Liveright, New York, 1976.

Homer, The Iliad (translated by Fagles, Robert), In: The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces, Sixth Edition, Vol. 1 (Mack, Maynard, Gen. Ed.), WW Norton & Company, New York, 1992, pp. 98-208.

Homer, The Odyssey (translated by Fitzgerald, Robert), In: The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces, Sixth Edition, Vol. 1 (Mack, Maynard, Gen. Ed.), WW Norton & Company, New York, 1992, pp. 208-540.

Mechnikov, Ilia, Etudes On the Nature of Man (Russian), The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, Moscow, 1961, “Part II. Attempts to Diminish the Evil Caused by the Disharmonies of Human Nature. Ch. VIII. Attempts of Philosophical Systems to Fight the Disharmonies of Human Nature”, pg. 145.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius, De Senectute (On Old Age), In: Cicero, On Old Age and On Friendship (Translated by Copley, Frank), The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1967, pp. 1-43.

Ashvaghosha, Buddhacharita, In: Conze, E. Buddhist Scriptures, Penguin Books, London, 1959, “Canto XXVI, 83-86”, pp.62-64.

Plato, The Apology of Socrates (Translated by Jowett, Benjamin), In: The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces, Sixth Edition, Vol. 1 (Mack, Maynard, Gen. Ed.), WW Norton & Company, New York, 1992, pg. 826.

Plato, Phaedo (Translated with notes by Gallop, David), Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1975, 69e6-72e2, pp.15-19; 72e3-78b3, pp.19-26; 78b4-84b8, pp.26-34; 105e2-105e9, pp.59-60; 107a, pg. 61.

Plato, The Republic (Translated by Shorey, Paul), In: The Collected Dialogues of Plato, Including the Letters (Edited by Hamilton, Edith and Cairns, Huntington), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1961, “Book VII. Allegory of the Cave, 7.514-7.518”, pp.747-750.

Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus (Translated by Bailey, C.), In: The Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers. The Complete Extant Writings of Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius, Marcus Aurelius (Edited by Oates, Whitney J), The Modern Library, New York, 1957, pp.30-31.

Epicurus, Letter to Menoeceus, pg. 31.

Aristotle, On Length and Shortness of Life (Translated by Ross, G.R.T.), In: The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Edited by Barnes, Jonathan), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 740-744.

Aristotle, On Youth and Old Age. On Life and Death (Translated by Ross, G.R.T.), In: The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Edited by Barnes, Jonathan), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, Vol. 1, pp. 745-763.

Aristotle, On the Heavens (Translated by Stocks, J.L.). In: The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Edited by Barnes, Jonathan), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, “Book 1. Chapters. 1, 2”, Vol. 1, 184a10-186a3, pp. 315-317.

Aristotle, Physics (Translated by Hardie, R.P. and Gaye, R.K.), In: The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Edited by Barnes, Jonathan), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, “Book 1. Ch. 3”, Vol. 1, 270b1-270b25, pp. 450-451.

Aristotle, On the Soul (translated with notes by Hett, Walter Stanley), In: Aristotle in Twenty-Three Volumes, William Heinemann Ltd., London, 1975, “Book 1. Ch. 2. Previous Theories as to the Nature of the Soul”, Vol. VIII, pp.19-31.

Hett, Walter Stanley, Introduction to Aristotle’s On the Soul, In: Aristotle in Twenty-Three Volumes, William Heinemann Ltd., London, 1975, Vol. VIII, pp.6-7.

Ovid, The Metamorphoses (Translated by Slavitt, David), The Johns Hopkins
University Press, London, 1994.

Theognis, “Immortality in Poetry”, In: Ancient Literary Criticism. The Principal Texts in New Translations (Edited by Russel, D.A. and Winterbottom, M.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1972, pg. 3.

Euripides, Medea (Translated by Coleridge, E.P.), The Internet Classics Archive http://classics.mit.edu [accessed 20.05.2004].

Apollodorus, Library and Epitome (Translated, edited and notes by Sir Frazer, James George), William Heinemann Ltd., London, 1921.
Also in: Perseus Project http://www.perseus.tufts.edu [accessed 20.05.2004].

Pausanias, Description of Greece (Translated by Jones, W.H.S. and Ormerod, H.A.), Perseus Project http://www.perseus.tufts.edu [accessed 06.06.2004].

Frazer, James George, Note 4 to Apollodorus, Library and Epitome 1.9.27., See fn. 37 above.

Shelley, Mary, Frankenstein or, the Modern Prometheus, Penguin Books, London, 1994.

Stoker, Bram, Dracula, Penguin Books, London, 1994.

Rowling, Joanne Kathleen, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Bloomsbury, London, 1997.

Koshey the Immortal, In: Russian Fairy Tales from Alexander Afanasiev’s Collection, Hudozhestvennaya Literatura, Moscow, 1979, pp. 103-106.

de Coster, Charles, The Glorious Adventures of Tyl Ulenspiegl (Translated by MacDougall, Allan Ross), Pantheon Books, New York, 1943.

Comparative Fabula Index. East European Fairytales (Compiled by Barag, G. et al.), Leningrad, 1979, Item 551.
Also in: Folklore and Post-Folklore: Structure , Typology, and Semiotics (Russian) http://www.ruthenia....ore/indexes.htm [accessed 20.06.2004].

The Soldier and Death, In: Russian Fairy Tales (Edited by Nechaev, Alexander), Veselka, Kiev, 1992, pp. 115-125.

Lieh Tzu, Quoted in: Gruman, Gerald, A History of Ideas about the Prolongation of Life, pp. 36-37, see fn. 53 below; and in: Ryazanzev, Sergey, Thanatology (Russian), The East-European Institute of Psychoanalysis, Saint-Petersburg, 1994, “Ch.XX1. In Search of the Elixir of Immortality”, pp.325-328.

The Epic of Ural Batyr, In: The Heroic Epos of the Peoples of the USSR (Translated from Bashkir into Russian by Kichakov, I. et al), Hudozhestvennaya Literatura, Moscow, 1975, Vol. 1, pp. 67-114.

Ovid, The Metamorphoses (Translated by Slavitt, David), The Johns Hopkins
University Press, London, 1994, “Book II”, ln. 636-646, pg. 37.

Apollodorus, Library and Epitome, 3.10.3.

Schiller, Friedrich, “Unsterblichkeit”(my transl.), In: Friedrich Schiller, Gedankengedichte. Vierter Teil. http://mitglied.lyco...e/schill14.html [accessed 24.06.2004].

Mechnikov, Ilia, Etudes On the Nature of Man (Russian), The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, Moscow, 1961, “Part II. Attempts to Diminish the Evil Caused by the Disharmonies of Human Nature. Ch. VIII. Attempts of Philosophical Systems to Fight the Disharmonies of Human Nature”, pg. 163.

Gruman, Gerald, A History of Ideas about the Prolongation of Life. The Evolution of Prolongevity Hypotheses to 1800, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Volume 56 (9), Philadelphia, 1966, “Taoist prolongevitism in theory”, pp. 28-37; and “Taoist prolongevitism in practice”, pp. 37-49.

Pindar, “Pythian Odes 10”, In: The Odes of Pindar (Translated by Sandys, John), Loeb Classical Library, London, 1919, pg. 293.
.
Herodotus, The Histories (Edited by Godley, A. D.), 4.13.1., Perseus Project http://www.perseus.tufts.edu [accessed 14.05.2004].

Pliny the Elder, The Natural History (Edited by Bostock, John), “Book 7. Chap. 2. The Wonderful Forms of Different Nations”; and “Book 7. Chap. 49. The Greatest Length of Life”, Perseus Project http://www.perseus.tufts.edu [accessed 16.05.2004].

Frazer, James George, Note 4 to Apollodorus, Library and Epitome 1.9.27., See fn. 37, 39 above.

Kerritwyn, O, Cerridwen and the Cauldron of Transformation, The White Moon Gallery http://www.thewhitem.../Cerridwen.html [accessed 05.07.2004].

Ershov, Peter, The Hunchbacked Horse (Russian), In: Fairy Tales by Russian Authors, Detskaya Literatura, 1980, pp.128-134.

The Epic of Jangar, In: The Heroic Epos of the Peoples of the USSR (Translated from Kalmyk into Russian by Lipkin, S.), Hudozhestvennaya Literatura, Moscow, 1975, Vol. 1, pp. 263-323.

Euripides, Alcestis (Translated by Thorburn, John E. Jr.), Mellen Press, New York, 2002.

Apollodorus, Library and Epitome, 2.7.7., see fn. 37 above.

Leviticus 18:5.

Genesis 3:17.

Exodus 20:12; Leviticus 26:3; Deuteronomy 5:33.

2 Kings 2:11.

Ezekiel 37.

Schwartz, Dov, Messianism in Medieval Jewish Thought (Hebrew), Bar-Ilan University Press, Ramat-Gan, Israel, 1997, pp. 142-143.

Encyclopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics (Hebrew), (Compiled and Edited by Steinberg, Avraham), The Shlezinger Institute, Jerusalem, 1994, Vol. IV, pp.309, 380-381.

Talmudic Encyclopedia. A Digest of Halachic Literature and Jewish Law from the Tannaitic Period to the Present Time (Hebrew), (Edited by Rabbi Berlin, Meyer), Talmudic Encyclopedia Institute, Jerusalem, 1997, Vol. XIX, pg. 456.

Rabbi Lau, Israel Meir, Judaism Halacha Lemaaseh. The Oral Tradition (Hebrew), Dfus Pele, Givataim, Israel, 1988, pp.370-371.

Schwartz, Dov, Messianism in Medieval Jewish Thought (Hebrew), Bar-Ilan University Press, Ramat-Gan, Israel, 1997, pp. 36, 105, 218-219.

The Arabian Nights or the Book of a Thousand and One Nights (Translated by Sir Burton, Richard Francis), Blue Ribbon Books, New York, 1932, “The Third Voyage of Sindbad”, pg. 390.

Donne, John, “Holy Sonnet 10. Death, be not proud”, In: The Norton Anthology of English Literature, Sixth Edition, Vol. 1, (Abrams, M.H., Gen. Ed.), WW Norton & Company, New York, 1993, pg. 1116.

Thomas, Dylan, “Do not go gentle into that good night”, In: The Norton Anthology of EnglishLiterature, Sixth Edition, Vol. 2 (Abrams, M.H., Gen. Ed.), WW Norton & Company, New York, 1993, pg. 2286.

Shaw, Bernard, Man and Superman, Penguin Books, London, 1993.

Shaw, Bernard, Back to Methuselah, Vail-Ballow Press Inc., New York, 1949.

Condorcet, Antoine-Nicolas, Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind (Translated by Barraclough, June), Library of Ideas, New York, 1955.

Gates, Michael, Elysian Enterprise. The Pursuit of Physical Immortality, Elysian Enterprise Inc., Chicago, 2002, www.elysianenterprise.com [accessed 28.04.2004]

The Mishnah with the Rambam’s Commentary (Hebrew), (Translated and edited by Rabbi Kapach, Yosef), Jerusalem, 1965, “Seder Nezikin”, pg. 205.

Schwartz, Dov, Messianism in Medieval Jewish Thought, pg. 72, see fn. 70 above.

http://www.great-quotes.com [accessed 20.07.2004].

Levshinov, Andrey, Russian Health-Improvement Systems (Russian), Olma Press, Moscow, 2002.

Anochin, Petr Kuzmich, Principles of the General Theory of Functional Systems (Russian), 1973,”Part 3. Afferent Synthesis”, http://galactic.org..../anoxin-7-3.htm [accessed 22.07.2004].

Ryazanzev, Sergey, Thanatology (Russian), The East-European Institute of
Psychoanalysis, Saint-Petersburg, 1994, pg.336.

#4 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 01 August 2005 - 09:40 AM

Dear Bruce.

I wished to inquire about the fate of my essay, which I submitted in September 2004.
I would really appreciate a hint about my chances.

I have to note that I admire this community and am proud to be part of it.

Live forever, Ilia.

istambler@hotmail.com
Ilia Stambler

#5 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 01 August 2005 - 09:43 AM

Hello, IIia.

Submission cut-off for the second book is Sept 5, 2005, after which we'll start the review process in order to put together essays for the second book.

Your submission is warmly appreciated... and I'd say you have a fair chance for inclusion, however, this is just my personal opinion, always open to correction from ImmInst Leadership.

Forever,
Bruce

#6 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 01 August 2005 - 11:16 AM

Thank you, Bruce.

Forever!

#7 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 29 November 2005 - 11:29 PM

Dear Bruce,

Thank you for the CD-Roms of the movie and the book. I am deeply impressed by their quality and scope. I hope there will be many more of such wonderful and successful projects. Generally, I am amazed by the constructive revolutionary power of ImmInst, and have just joined it as a full member.

I would also like to use this opportunity to ask about the opinion of ImmInst editorial board members about my essay and the possibility of its inclusion in the new book project.

I thank you again.
Live forever, Ilia.

#8 Bruce Klein

  • Topic Starter
  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 29 November 2005 - 11:32 PM

Dear Ilia, istambler@hotmail.com

Thank you for your kind words. Your essay is still in consideration as we look to secure donations in order to help hire an editor in order to see the second book to completion within 2006.

My reply as made back in Aug 2005, is currently still applicable:

"Your submission is warmly appreciated... and I'd say you have a fair chance for inclusion, however, this is just my personal opinion, always open to correction from ImmInst Leadership."

Forever, yours!

Bruce




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users