Not sure it's the best solution but at least it allow me to improve my argumentation and the way my ideas about the subjects are influencing others.
I think for future development, it would be interested to list the frequent, usual arguments of the Deathists and lists the contra-arguments that we manage to present.
A sort of wiki of the Arguments of the Deathists ! Maybe it's already listed on this wonderful forum ? Sorry if it is.
I think there are two parts of their arguments :
1. People must die because :
1. If they don't, we risk overpopulation2. Everything dies in the nature. It's the Law of the Nature.
3. It allows to renew the species with new people, new genes, new ideas.
4. If we live longer, it would be boring
5. What will you do if you live longer? It won't make you happier.
6. if they don't, the cost of retired people would be desastrous
7. It's the beauty of life to die. If we don't die, it would make life and the moments inside that less valuable.
2. Research on aging is a bad thing because :
1. There are a lot more other diseases to treat, which are more frequent and kill more people. In particular, most diseases are linked to our environment and the pollution, the way we are living, our diet. Not aging2. It will increase the inequality between Rich and Poor countries because only the rich people will benefit from these future researches, as it is already the case for the most advanced drugs.
3. It will cost a lot of money. We should spend this money to decrease the inequality between rich and poor countries.
4. Researches will lead to a dead end. Ending aging is indeed impossible. Researches where mice had their lifespan increased, prove nothing because they aren't human.
5. Researches are made on animals. They are cruel so.
Edited by Pour_la_Science, 22 January 2011 - 08:46 AM.