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


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

boundries on Immortality


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 bacopa

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 2,223 posts
  • 159
  • Location:Boston

Posted 22 October 2003 - 06:02 PM


I just finished reading the John Harris speach and it's interesting that he brings up some of the troubling questions that I've thought about since joining this site. The idea of regulation of longevity. He emphasizes that longevity will inevitably happen probably as a result of some other intended treatement for disease. But assuming that we reach a significant age how should people control who gets to live longer? Obviously the well informed can easily take the necassary steps towards life extension. But is it unfair to others who care about life but who have not read up on longevity as much as people at this site?
Perhaps those who work the hardest most deserve it kind of thinking should apply? Or does it simply boil down to socioeconomic factors?

But should it be as simple as people who "want" it get it, or should they have a certain academic degree or status in say their community? What about exceedingly good people who adhere to community standards vs. less ethical types. Should there be a set limit on the age one gets to like Harris warned? If a person lives longer as a result of another procedure, than what? I don't think there should be "set limits", but ethicly it's a whole other issue and I get baffled. I know this topic has been discussed before and feel free to not answer questions that may have already been adressed as I have a tendency to do this sometimes. thanks

Edited by dfowler, 22 October 2003 - 06:27 PM.


#2 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 22 October 2003 - 07:18 PM

He emphasizes that longevity will inevitably happen probably as a result of some other intended treatement for disease. But assuming that we reach a significant age how should people control who gets to live longer? Obviously the well informed can easily take the necassary steps towards life extension. But is it unfair to others who care about life but who have not read up on longevity as much as people at this site?
Perhaps those who work the hardest most deserve it kind of thinking should apply? Or does it simply boil down to socioeconomic factors?


We should make practical longevity an option IMO and let them come. We should even make it available to our enemies.

Let all who learn of this understand which groups are defending their right to live and find no way to mistake who would deny them life. Respect individual choice and let us seek to unite, not exclude and divide over this cause as it will harbor the worst of all scenarios to try to play God with the results.

Why should we have the right to determine who is worthy? Just because we can?

Let history be that judge.

#3 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,074 posts
  • 2,005
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 22 October 2003 - 10:21 PM

Those who want immortality should not be barred. Individual choice should rule in the immortalist world.

Socio-economic factors will cause ethical problems in the beginning. There is no getting around this. If we wait until every single person has access to the technology it will NEVER happen.

No one should feel guilty unless they personally and willfully with malice prevent others from achieving immortality. And...if you want to feel good about yourself, spread the word...spread the knowledge.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 bacopa

  • Topic Starter
  • Validating/Suspended
  • 2,223 posts
  • 159
  • Location:Boston

Posted 22 October 2003 - 10:41 PM

Here here, I completely agree...we should leave it open to everyone because that is the democratic and fair way. Many would be too afraid to take the step anyway, I'm not condoning this but I do think that chaos would not ensue. But it could get messy when all those normal life humans get envious of the longer life ones. Just the way the Jews are sometimes persecuted along with other minority groups I fear that the longer lived humans might be resented so I think this will be tricky indeed. Also what about set limits? Obviously this being the Immortality Inst most would probably want to live forever as the poll indicated how do we do it in a world of mortals? Do we have to change our identitieis and sneak by like a refugee or will it work out somehow?

#5 imminstmorals

  • Guest
  • 68 posts
  • 0

Posted 24 October 2003 - 01:03 AM

I fear that the longer lived humans might be resented
If the everyone is fairly treated and paid according to their works, this problem can be solved

how do we do it in a world of mortals?
Slow age down, den we can figure everythings out, we need government's propaganda centre while science slightly takes over and make our life equal!

and we need support of everyone so mortals don't conflict wif immortals, and mortal joins immortals and learn medical science, and educated to learn meaning of immortality rather than philosophy of life


To get started, bridge a course and see if we can change mortals' perspectives
=D

I just hope this isn't a liar!!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users