ImmInst Chat Archive:
BJKlein -- why life extension for you?
Harv -- My answer is: I'm not suicidal. I see no reason to cut my life short without reason!
BJKlein -- are most people like you?
Harv -- Sadly, no. Most people think they need a good reason for life extension. They see dying as the natural default.
BJKlein -- is it our duty to change their minds?
Harv -- Good question. I always feel uncomfortable trying to change people's minds.
BJKlein -- why?
Harv -- I think science and facts can be presented so that everybody sees the same data. But for personal choices or preferences, I think everybody has to make up their own mind for what they want.
Harv -- We certainly can explain our preferences and reasons, to see who agrees with us. But I don't see a need to try to make people agree with us.
BJKlein -- perhaps, if more people agreed, it would improve our chances at life extension?
Harv -- That is an indirect argument. Directly working toward life extension would improve our chances. Getting other people to agree in case they might help work seems to be an indirect approach IMHO.
BJKlein -- Perhaps it depends on opportunity cost in one's current work..
Harv -- Perhaps.
BJKlein -- Do you see the ImmInst conferences as a possible benefit to life extension?
Harv -- To be totally blunt, I see them as recruitment. I don't see recruitment as a big goal. I know that we have a lot of political opposition. But disease and old age are the more direct threats in my opinion. I think we focus too much on recruitment because it is easy.
BJKlein -- welcome Chestnut.. how are you?
Harv -- The Internet already gives us high bandwidth communications at low cost. I am not sure we need to physically meet all together at the same place and time. It is lots of fun, but it costs a lot of money and doesn't buy us much.
BJKlein -- Thus, Harv, you think we should be further along in life extension research?
Chestnut --
Harv -- I don't know that we "should" be further along. I think it will be a long and slow process of research. Each disease or cause of old age death we cure will only buy us a few short years until the second leading cause of death kills us. I think we will need to cure almost every disease before immortality is attained.
Harv -- I question people who think we can cure aging in a decade or two. Even fixing all our genes won't change maximum lifespan. Adding telomeres won't stop replicative copy errors. We are now living long enough for everyone to get heart disease, diabetes and alzheimer’s. Each of these will be very difficult to solve. Solving it won't extend lifespan much because of the others. Every single one has to be solved differently, because they have different causes.
Harv -- This doesn't mean that I am against life-extension or don't think it worthwhile. I love my life. I want it to last indefinitely. We definitely should keep working on curing all diseases and extending lifespan!
BJKlein -- sure, i agree.. just wonder if we should skip the biology and go straight to mind-computer interface
Harv -- I'm not sure that is much easier. I work in the IT industry, and we still can't keep our computers from crashing. Even though it seems like computers are better understood than biology, they are definitely not more reliable. Meat humans still greatly outlive machines.
Harv -- Back to the topic. Why?
Mind -- Because life is good
BJKlein -- how do you know?
Harv -- Yes. We want more of it.
BJKlein -- perhaps death is better?
Mind -- I guess it isn't for everyone, but for me it is good enough to want it to continue indefinitely
Mind -- Non-existence is not better than existence
BJKlein -- or, perhaps, rather, what is after death is better
Mind -- nothing is after death
Mind -- nothing
Mind -- NOTHING
Mind -- NOTHING!!!!!
LazLo -- More than we want it, more than we have evolved with the imperative to defend and expand it, we need more life to grow not only as individuals but as a species
BJKlein -- how do you know?
BJKlein -- seems hard to know about 'nothing'
Mind -- No one has ever contacted me after being dead
BJKlein -- perhaps they're to far away
Mind -- There is no reliable evidence that any consciousness exists after death
Harv -- I don't know if we "need" to grow as a species. this is just a preference. You want to. I want to. Some people don't want us to. I don't know that we can prove one way is right.
Mind -- I play in the real world....not in the imaginary one
LazLo -- We need to grow to prevent extinction
BJKlein -- seems three options: Die - Stagnate or Grow
Harv -- I don't take medicines that haven't been tested. I don't load software that hasn't been scanned for viruses. I don't trust people until I know them. Likewise, I don't want to let my life end without good evidence of an afterlife.
LazLo -- there is no steady state, survival of the fittest, extinction for those that don't
Schaefer -- You scan all software you download for viruses?
Harv -- That is true, Lazlo. If we don't grow, we stagnate and die. So that is a good argument for "needing" to expand.