33 replies to this topic

[Bruce Klein]

Why Die? A Beginner's Guide to Living Forever By Herb Bowie - As the title suggest, this is a good intro to immortality. A real look into immortality, and a good book for the unintroduced.

Amazon

[ocsrazor]

Hi BJ,

I was posting another book to this section and noticed you had this in here. There are very few books on the subject that I would tell people not to read, but this is one of them. It has an extremely high crap to content ratio

Best,
Peter

[Bruce Klein]

Yeh,

Bowie comes from the rebreathing school. However I'd still suggest this one.... just with the caveat that 'rebirthing' and mysticism is useless to attaining physical immortaltiy. However, if you can read past this, the philosophical aspects of the book are quite good, in my opinion.. and I'd recommend the book on these grounds alone, especially to a non-technical audience. Or maybe I'm just blinded to objectivity because this was one of the first books specificially about Physical Immortaltiy I found when creating this site back in Nov 2002.

Either way, it's worth mentioning and debating here at least.

[Sophianic]

ocsrazor: There are very few books on the subject that I would tell people not to read, but this is one of them. It has an extremely high crap to content ratio.

I must disagree. This book is grounded in common sense (for the most part). Although it does contain some questionable elements, I believe that (overall) it can still serve as a good intro to the feasibility and desirability of living forever in this world.

BJKlein: the philosophical aspects of the book are quite good, in my opinion.. and I'd recommend the book on these grounds alone, especially to a non-technical audience.

I would have to agree with this opinion. This book contains many stimulating ideas for discussion, especially for those new to the immortalist viewpoint, and even for the seasoned immortalist who wants to stimulate her/his thinking on some aspect of living forever in this world.

[thefirstimmortal]

Hi BJ,

I was posting another book to this section and noticed you had this in here.  There are very few books on the subject that I would tell people not to read, but this is one of them.  It has an extremely high crap to content ratio

Best,
Peter

Now, you all got me wondering, so I got a copy today. It starts out with a good meme.

Dedicated to Pauline: Who made it clear, from the very beginning, that nothing less than forever would do;
Why die? Because you think you have no other choice?
Because your ancestors did?
Because it's the "right thing" to do?
Why not live?
Because you're worthy to,
Because you want to,
Because you're a vital part of the global human community.

[thefirstimmortal]

Here is another good meme from the book.

Many people make the unconscious decision that they have to die. They assume that their fate is ordained by the laws of nature, or the laws of God. This choice is made so early in life, and at such an unconscious level, that few people ever even challenge it. So I wanted to ask a question that would shake people up. Because even to ask this question is to imply something unthinkable for many people-that death is a choice, and not a foregone conclusion.

[thefirstimmortal]

Inspirational Quote from Why Die.

For no matter how long anyone may live, we will all and always be beginners when it comes to being here forever.

[thefirstimmortal]

Nice Peom from why Die.

To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And etrinity in an hour.

[thefirstimmortal]

A little short on this meme, the book could have used millions or billions instead of hundreds of thousands.


I am not speaking metaphorically. At the same time, I will be talking about actually living for hundreds and thousands of years,

[Utnapishtim]

Unless you have been really been paying attention to scientific progress in the relevant fields over the last few years and thinking hard about where it might lead us the assumption that death is an inevitability is actually pretty understandable. All you have to look at is the historical precedent.

I do agree with you though, that the assumption of death's immutability is so deeply engrained in most people that it is almost immune to evidence to the contrary.

However what springs to mind is the old platitude about extraordinary claims needing to be backed up with extraordinary evidence. To suggest that the current generation of humanity can avoid the fate of the millions who have walked the earth before us is clearly a VERY extraordinary claim. All of us here at imminst are also taking a great personal risk by emotionally investing in such a possibility. The final years of Ponce De Leon must have been bitter ones indeed.

It will Joe and Jane Average will require a GREAT DEAL more evidence before they are prepared to overturn their existing worldviews for what they may quite reasonably conclude to be merely a mirage.

[thefirstimmortal]

Another Gem


No matter how we approach the subject, though, we always seem to arrive at the same conclusion: that living forever is a practical and meaningful goal.

[thefirstimmortal]

Important meme

Many forms of social conditioning prepare us to pack it in only 70 or 80 years

[thefirstimmortal]

Nice point to ponder from Why Die.

Most people have been raised in one or more religious systems, and all of us have grown up in the shadow of religion. Is physical immortality the next step in the evolution of religion.

[thefirstimmortal]

Dead right on this one.


Surprisingly, not everyone will be exited with the possibility of living forever. As the number of people pursuing immortality is increasing, so will active opposition to the movement. Since every major religion is based on some sort of afterlife, much antagonism will come from this quarter.

[thefirstimmortal]

Important for those who have made the vow, till death do us part.


These cynics insisted that those who had eagerly pledged to remain faithful until death did them part would all too quickly renounce their vows when staring into thr face of eternity.

[thefirstimmortal]

From Why Die

So just because physical immortality hasn't happened yet, don't make the mistake of thinking that it isn't happening now.

[Lazarus Long]

I like it Soph but I prefer the wording:

I hereby declare death to be real, not necessary but final, and certainly not inevitable.

It flows more and the nuance is more precise don't you think?

[thefirstimmortal]

Unless you have been really been paying attention to scientific progress in the relevant fields over the last few years and thinking hard about where it might lead us the assumption that death is an inevitability is actually pretty understandable. All you have to look at is the historical precedent.

I do agree with you though, that the assumption of death's immutability is so deeply engrained in most people that it is almost immune to evidence to the contrary.

However what springs to mind is the old platitude about extraordinary claims needing to be backed up with extraordinary evidence. To suggest that the current generation of humanity can avoid the fate of the millions who have walked the earth before us is clearly a VERY extraordinary claim. All of us here at imminst are also taking a great personal risk by emotionally investing in such a possibility. The final years of Ponce De Leon must have been bitter ones indeed.

It will Joe and Jane Average will require a GREAT DEAL more evidence before they are prepared to overturn their existing worldviews for what they may quite reasonably conclude to be merely a mirage.

Your right Utnapishtim, how do you think the assumptions of death's immutability got so engrained that they seldom get overcome? Why do you think it is that most of us here "get it" while billions do not.

[thefirstimmortal]

Hi BJ,

I was posting another book to this section and noticed you had this in here.  There are very few books on the subject that I would tell people not to read, but this is one of them.  It has an extremely high crap to content ratio

Best,
Peter

Peter overall is correct, there is a high crap to content ratio, at time the book gets flaky and if you only have a chance to read less than 10 books a year, this is one to steer clear of. If your exhaustively data mining however, you search for the best memes where ever the source, and sometimes you have to move tons of dirt to get to a few good memes.

[thefirstimmortal]

However what springs to mind is the old platitude about extraordinary claims needing to be backed up with extraordinary evidence. To suggest that the current generation of humanity can avoid the fate of the millions who have walked the earth before us is clearly a VERY extraordinary claim. All of us here at imminst are also taking a great personal risk by emotionally investing in such a possibility.

What do you see as being the greatest risk? How possible is it that we are wrong about our belief, I mean we do have a belief in the sense that no one knows for sure right now, in that sense we have a belief just as those in religion have a belief in their afterlife.

[Sophianic]

Lazarus Long: I like it Soph but I prefer the wording:

I hereby declare death to be real, not necessary but final, and certainly not inevitable.

It flows more and the nuance is more precise don't you think?

Yes, there's better flow here. More precisely (grammatically) ...
I hereby declare death to be real ~ not necessary, but final ~ and certainly not inevitable.
But the addition of 'certainly' sounds a little too confident for me.

More succinctly ...
I hereby declare death to be real, but not necessary ~ final, but not inevitable.
I prefer this version because it links lack of necessity with reality ~ and links finality with lack of inevitability ~ without sounding too confident. The break between 'necessary' and 'final' also lends greater emphasis to the term 'final.'

[Sophianic]

thefirstimmortal: Peter overall is correct, there is a high crap to content ratio,

This, to me, is an overstatement.

at time the book gets flaky and if you only have a chance to read less than 10 books a year, this is one to steer clear of.

I'd be interested in knowing where you think the book gets flaky ... and the reasons why. It is true that the author taps into new age ideas and ideas that appear to have religious overtones, but I think he succeeds (for the most part) in keeping them within a materialist and naturalistic framework.

If your exhaustively data mining however, you search for the best memes where ever the source, and sometimes you have to move tons of dirt to get to a few good memes.

I think this comment does a disservice to both the book and the author. The author was an editor of a magazine on the prospect of immortality for six years, and did a lot to spread "the good news" about this prospect. The book and the author cannot be dismissed so easily, and I recommend both as a good introduction for the lay reader.

Edited by Sophianic, 20 December 2003 - 01:29 PM.

[Sophianic]

Utnapishtim: Unless you have been really been paying attention to scientific progress in the relevant fields over the last few years and thinking hard about where it might lead us the assumption that death is an inevitability is actually pretty understandable. All you have to look at is the historical precedent.

Not just scientific progress ~ but the rate of progress is accelerating (a la Kurzweil). This latter point is even more important than the former.

To suggest that the current generation of humanity can avoid the fate of the millions who have walked the earth before us is clearly a VERY extraordinary claim.

Bold, yes, but not extraordinary. Not if you understand (a) the progress; and (b) the conservative estimate of 20,000 years of progress in the 21st century.

All of us here at imminst are also taking a great personal risk by emotionally investing in such a possibility. The final years of Ponce De Leon must have been bitter ones indeed.

Any emotional investment requires an element of risk. For myself, I harbor the expectation that I will never die, but I also understand and appreciate that I may die tomorrow quite unexpectedly.

Joe and Jane Average will require a GREAT DEAL more evidence before they are prepared to overturn their existing worldviews for what they may quite reasonably conclude to be merely a mirage.

I somehow doubt that Joe and Jane Average will require any evidence. If seeing is believing, they'll be ready to join the parade when the time comes.

[thefirstimmortal]

This, to me, is an overstatement.

It may be.

I'd be interested in knowing where you think the book gets flaky ... and the reasons why.  It is true that the author taps into new age ideas and ideas that appear to have religious overtones, but I think he succeeds (for the most part) in keeping them within a materialist and naturalistic framework.

It's in the new age ideas that are sprinkled through the book. That's why I think Peter's claim has some validity. I'm mean the whole rebirthing thing made my eyes glaze over. Also, the subject matter was more about immortalism, which isn't quite the same as physical immortality.

I think this comment does a disservice to both the book and the author.  The author was an editor of a magazine on the prospect of immortality for six years, and did a lot to spread "the good news" about this prospect.  The book and the author cannot be dismissed so easily, and I recommend both as a good introduction for the lay reader.

I'm not dismissing the book, or the author. I'm a book hoar, so it doesn't take a lot for me to think a book was worth the read, and this one certainly was. If their is one good meme for every 100 pages, I think I've spend my time well, and this book is loaded with them. But to someone who doesn't read much, or is just sorta looking into the idea of immortality, I really think the rebirthing issue is going to cast serious doubt about the route to immortality.

...and I think you are focusing too much on my agreement with Peter on one facet of the book, because in the main, I was supporting your position that there was many a pearl to be found in this read.

[Lazarus Long]

More succinctly ...
I hereby declare death to be real, but not necessary ~ final, but not inevitable.
I prefer this version because it links lack of necessity with reality ~ and links finality with lack of inevitability ~ without sounding too confident. The break between 'necessary' and 'final' also lends greater emphasis to the term 'final.'

That's fine and I agree actually on both counts. I was intentionally confronting the idea of finality with the certainty of the counter proposition. It was emphatic as I had very much enjoyed your "declarative" notion. I was attempting to contribute to precisely the idea as it evolved into through our comparative collaboration.

I prefer version 2.0 over 1.0 as demonstrative of significant improvement and removing the contentious aspect of including "certainty" is not a critical element as much as a pragmatic distinction of nuance that doesn't require inclusion IMO either.

[thefirstimmortal]

The author was an editor of a magazine on the prospect of immortality for six years, and did a lot to spread "the good news" about this prospect.  The book and the author cannot be dismissed so easily, and I recommend both as a good introduction for the lay reader.

I would love to read that material Sophianic, if you could guide me to it. In addition to feeling that a few sections of the book were flaky, I equally feel a few sections were pure genius.

[Sophianic]

thefirstimmortal: I'm not dismissing the book, or the author ... But to someone who doesn't read much, or is just sorta looking into the idea of immortality, I really think the rebirthing issue is going to cast serious doubt about the route to immortality.

A comment like 'a high crap to content ratio,' and agreement with said comment, is tantamount to a dismissal. But I can appreciate your concern with the re-birthing issue. People associated with this movement have made some outrageous claims (e.g., immortal yogis who have lived for hundreds or thousands of years, some before Christ). It's claims like these that cast doubt.

Re-birthing as a technique has reputedly worked for many thousands of people (some say millions), not as a direct route to immortality (necessarily), but as emotional and spiritual preparation for living forever. If anyone is interested in learning more (and I think we should at least keep an open mind), do a search for 'Leonard Orr.'

thefirstimmortal: ...and I think you are focusing too much on my agreement with Peter on one facet of the book, because in the main, I was supporting your position that there was many a pearl to be found in this read.

At first, you expressed genuine enthusiasm, but then I got the impression that you just wanted to exploit what little value you could find in the book while discarding the rest. What may appear to be 'crap' can often, with more study, yield some very interesting gems. If we "throw the baby out with the bathwater," we miss opportunities to create a more nuanced picture of what we seek.

[Sophianic]

That's fine and I agree actually on both counts ...

I appreciate the feedback. I intend to use my declaration as a reminder of what's essential in my study of death.

[Sophianic]

thefirstimmortal: I would love to read that material Sophianic, if you could guide me to it.

I had to do a little digging, but I found the first six issues of Forever Alive (Lite) in the e-text.org archives. Forever Alive, edited by Herb Bowie, was published by People Forever International from 1989 to 1995 and is of definite historical interest to immortalists. A note to Bruce: with the appropriate permission, these might merit an archive at ImmInst.

Here's an executive summary of the publication:

Forever Alive is the world's premier magazine on the subject of physical immortality. We offer a new vision of humanity, as completely whole, beyond the polarities of life and death, spirit and body, mind and heart, male and female. This pioneering magazine explores the transformative powers of embracing a life without limits.

Edited by Sophianic, 21 December 2003 - 02:40 PM.

[thefirstimmortal]

A comment like 'a high crap to content ratio,' and agreement with said comment, is tantamount to a dismissal. But I can appreciate your concern with the re-birthing issue.  People associated with this movement have made some outrageous claims (e.g., immortal yogis who have lived for hundreds or thousands of years, some before Christ).  It's claims like these that cast doubt.

It's those outrageous memes that are in the book that qualify as crap, and just because a book has some crap in it, doesn't mean that it should be dismissed but those rebirthing claims are hard for a fence sitter to overcome imo.

On the other hand the below quote could push one person in the right direction.

Many people make the unconscious decision that they have to die. They assume that their fate is ordained by the laws of nature, or the laws of God. This choice is made so early in life, and at such an unconscious level, that few people ever even challenge it. So I wanted to ask a question that would shake people up. Because even to ask this question is to imply something unthinkable for many people-that death is a choice, and not a foregone conclusion.

At first, you expressed genuine enthusiasm, but then I got the impression that you just wanted to exploit what little value you could find in the book while discarding the rest.  What may appear to be 'crap' can often, with more study, yield some very interesting gems.  If we "throw the baby out with the bathwater," we miss opportunities to create a more nuanced picture of what we seek.

I do have genuine enthusiasm for the book, and I do want to exploit the value, if you mean by exploit, to utilize or to get the value or usefulness out of as to exploit a mine. I'm not saying the memes are of little value, just that there's a lot of rocks in the mine. The gold is still there, just needs more work to get to it.