29 replies to this topic

[eternaltraveler]

I am curious how people here would respond in such a situation. I do not believe it is an entirely unrealistic one either. I foresee a future where the road to physical immortality is developed, but is made illegal. The penalty could range from fines, prison, the reversal of the procedure, or worse. And something like this is likely to be exceedingly complicated, and thus difficult for clandestine scientists to accomplish.

thoughts?

[lightowl]

I would not fight for immortality with the risk of loosing my life unless I had absolutely no other choice. I see my entire existence as a fight for my life, so it would make no sense to risk loosing the "war" in one battle. Fx. I will not defend "my" country by going to the battle field. The risk of death is to high. I would much rather move to another country that is better protected.

The hole patriotism and nationalism thing is in my opinion total BS. So is holy ground and sacred land. Places are only special because we invest in them. We build structures and connections that are permanent only through our dependency of those. But it seems that special feelings towards places is being explained by the connection to our ancestors, which has absolutely zero value to me. Why should I defend a place because my ancestors did? This world gives me other choices.

Yes, I hear you say, but you cant run forever. And you are right. I cant run forever NOW, but I might in the future and I do have another choice. I can always join the enemy. And believe me, I would if my life depended on it. Now, that might sound a bit selfish, but you have the same choice. Why should I defend you with my life when you have the same choices as I. All I need is my technology to function, and I know there are people who thinks the same way. So they can come with me if they like.

Now, there is of course fights that can be won without the risk of death. It is not like I would just run if some lame ant-farm attacked me, right. It would take a hell of a lot of ants to kill me. The same I would say with other minor enemies. Yes, the risk of death is a constantly dynamic value.

So, what does all this have to do with fighting for the right to, or possession of immortality? Well... What I guess I am saying is. You almost always have a choice when the "war" is for your life. When that choice has to be made, your feelings goes out the window. And so does your "life" as in possessions, friends, family, job, country, knowledge, passion, power, certainty and anything you might think is worth your existence. It is not.

IMO.

[Kalepha]

I wholeheartedly agree with lightowl. If a superpower actually had the ability to directly prevent me from using anti-aging technology, it is likely they could kill me on the spot if i put up some foolishly passionate fight. I'm taking "directly" to mean that i would have absolutely no choices or hope in ever acquiring the means to become immortal even while those means are in principle already available. Depending on the actual circumstances, i would probably just commit suicide, but only after i put in an honest effort to assassinate some of the top entities of the perpetrating superpower.

[eternaltraveler]

Are there things worth dying for?

[Kalepha]

Perhaps there can be various interpretations of the original question. One might interpret it as going to war in the event a superpower denies available anti-aging technology. "Available" being the operating word. If “war” is defined as one fighting for a state, then no; i would not fight to the death. If “war” is defined as one fighting as a mercenary, a hit man, or for a militia, then yes; i would fight to the death, but would make every effort to self-terminate before there’s a chance to kill me directly or take me as a prisoner.

Edited by Nate Barna, 17 January 2005 - 10:45 PM.

[lightowl]

Are there things worth dying for?

That is a good question. I have thought about that for a long time but nothing has yet come to mind. In my opinion everything is random. There is no meaning to life other than staying alive.

The strongest reason to die for is so far, in others opinion, ones family. But what is it exactly you are dying for when you protect your family? In the earliest human stages it was a matter of life and death to have a family to protect everybody. So in that sense you would actually protect your own life when fighting for a family members life. ( both adult and child ) But that time has long gone. A person can reject ones family and still have a good chance to live in this world of ours. Then some say: but you are fighting for the next generation of your family. Well.. Yes, but how much does that really matter in this world of 2 billion plus families. And how much is the memory of you actually worth? Pretty damn little if you ask me.

My second reason, and probably the one I would sign up to is if earth was attacked by some entity. That is, a direct attack on humanity it self. Total species annihilation. But in that case I would still be fighting for my own life. So that does not really count, does it? We all still depend on everybody else. However indirectly.

The question really is: What unselfish death would you suffer?

I have not found one yet. Well... I guess I'm pretty selfish. But bare in mind that selfishness in not always a bad thing. I still have the urge to help humanity on the grounds that by doing so, I am helping my self. If I help others, they are more likely to help me... and so on...

The main reason I think people fight to the death is pride and instinct. Which are probably the same thing.

[eternaltraveler]

In my opinion everything is random. There is no meaning to life other than staying alive.

I would die for those that I love, and for IDEAS that I love. I would die for something greater than myself.

It is for this reason that I am worthy of immortality. To live forever for no other reason than to sustain my existence; this seems ludicrous to me.

No, I would not fight because a superpower says so unless it just so happened that I agreed with what the cause was. Is this likely? No. But in a World War II type scenario, you bet your ass. Good against evil.

And no, this is not instinct or pride. My life has a very high value, but there are things with a higher value that I would spend it on.

It seems to me if this were not the case there would be very little worth living for.

[lightowl]

What we love and what is worthy is entirely subjective terms. In our universe there are no natural laws of conduct. What is good and evil is not defined by anything other than the "random" complexity of our brains and the culture of the monkeys that where us. I don't claim to understand what this universe can do in locations of extreme complexity and power. But I doubt it will "love" anything cute and fuzzy.

What is to me frustrating, is that the future seems endlessly impossible to predict when one can only imagine it from this limited base of knowledge. The only thing that matters is to have some kind of existence. Everything else can be recorded, collected and recreated with total accuracy with time.

I don't need a fixed value on my life. It is hard to find a currency that is universal. Especially in an accelerating technological timeline. I am happy with what I can get with time, if I can just live. Whatever living is.

[Infernity]

If the way to immortality could be arrived only if I'd sacrifice my own life for it, I will insist to find another way- I don't want to lose all the 'inner me' for others.
It may sound egoistic, but hey, if I'll die, it won't have any difference (well at least not to me)!
I will happily help others to get the immortality, but not if that is including the price of my very own life!

~Infernity

[123456]

I voted yes. However it depends on the situation. For example there could be other ways of obtaining immortality such as a immortality virus; in that case I would not fight to the death. I am sure you guys understand what I am saying. I know the point of the question but I am just trying to be exacting as possible.

-Such question reveals the will and determination of an individual.

[Mind]

I voted no, with this caveat: the question is a little too vague to answer yes. If I was on my "death bed" and someone was trying to keep me from taking the immortality pill then I would fight to the death (my death possibly). If I had a predictable 20 or 30 years of life left, I would wait and see, and try to change the power structure through non-violence....memetic engineering.

So it boils down to this, if the odds of dying by not taking the pill are greater than the odds of fighting then I would fight.

[quadclops]

I voted yes, I would fight to the death. That is, I would fight to the death of the "entity" trying to prevent my freedom of choice in the matter of immortality. I would not however, fight to my own death, as that would be pointless, considering that the reason we were fighting was to prevent my death, not cause it.

Are there things worth dying for?

I think the only thing that I might consider worth risking certain death for would be the survival of the entire human species. Remember that movie in the 90's with the kid who played Frodo, about a comet or something that was about to hit the Earth? A shuttle load of astronauts goes up to deflect it and ends up splitting it in two. The smaller peice hit's the Earth and nearly ends civilization, but the larger peice, which is a Planet Killer, is still on the way. All looks doomed, but at the last second the astronauts come up with a plan whereby they can save the Earth, but at the certain cost of their own lives via atomic bomb.

I'd like to think I could make the sacrifice, if there was absolutley no other way. Course I'd probably need a serious change of underpants while I was doing it. [lol]

[psudoname]

Anyone who tries to stop immortality being acheved is guilty of the attempted murder of the entire human race. If we do nothing we will die anyway, so it is worth any risk as long as there is some chance of sucess.

As to what I would do in that case it depends on who was trying to stop immortality. If it is religous extreamists or another group working illegally then the police should do most of the fighting. If the UK bans transhumanism, I will leave and move somewhere with more respect for freedom.

I would be prepared to risk my own life to get immortality (though as I have said this isn't really a risk) and to defend the lives of my loved ones, but not to defend my country.

[mnosal]

I would fight to the death for my Children. If the reality of IMMORTALITY(ie the drug or medical process) is not directly in front of me, their genetic code is the only chance for my immortality.

If a government or Religious zealot was standing between us and immortality and my death could change that I would surely lose my own to save millions.(although that altruism could just be residue from my military brainwashed days:))

[apocalypse]

Immortality, freedom, independece... these concepts seem intrinsically linked. In a world that's in constant change one seeks something that is constant, something that does not change, one seeks freedom from external forces, independence from the shackles of the world.

Survival in this world is a constant struggle, a fight for life. Those who do not fight give up, and give in to the death meme, in to slavery, in to dependence.

To trascend the limitations, to acquire the power to withstand the very ravages of time, may very well require that one gives up one's humanity in the process. Would one slowly fade, slowly die in order to be reborn into something more? Even if one's goals, one's dreams, one's hopes no longer resembled anything one could've ever imagined?

It is that a young man may dream in this world, but as he develops and he acquires the power to do so, he may no longer desire that which he initially seeked. Would one so stare into the abyss, and embrace the darkness in order to leave one's mortality behind?

[knite]

I would fight to the death for my Children. If the reality of IMMORTALITY(ie the drug or medical process) is not directly in front of me, their genetic code is the only chance for my immortality.

If a government or Religious zealot was standing between us and immortality and my death could change that I would surely lose my own to save millions.(although that altruism could just be residue from my military brainwashed days:))

This is admirable, I would like to think that I would do the same, but this is one of those things you can never be sure youll make the right decision until you are in the situation.

THere are many ways to fight, I for one would build up a company(no matter what it took.) and buy an island and manufacture it there. Easy as pie, screw a government that wants its people to die, ill make sure whoever wants it gets it.

[psudoname]

THere are many ways to fight, I for one would build up a company(no matter what it took.) and buy an island and manufacture it there. Easy as pie, screw a government that wants its people to die, ill make sure whoever wants it gets it.

Sounds like a good idear. What would your company do?

I would fight to the death to stop myself dying.

[alpha_omega]

It would all depend, if it was a once in a lifetime oppertunity, then yes, i would fight to the death, as 80 years alive is as good as 0 years alive compared to infinity years alive. if there was another way, either by waiting, or finding someone to fight for me, then i would be patient and not risk losing the oppertunity forever

Are there things worth dying for?

me answer would be no, cos when your dead, everyone else is as good as dead to you, you wont see them again or remember them, as you would be dead and unable think, and things like your country are not worth dying for, as countries are just land ruled by a certain person or goverment, would you die for your house or your garden?

[Infernity]

Well, good thinking alpha_omega, would you sacrifice yourself for humans? perhaps, take a look: http://www.imminst.o...f=137&t=5096

I wonder what would you do.

-Infernity

[emerson]

I for one would build up a company(no matter what it took.) and buy an island and manufacture it there. Easy as pie, screw a government that wants its people to die, ill make sure whoever wants it gets it.

Not so easy. Any large country could blow you out of the water pretty easily. A labratory on an uncharted desert island somewhere? You're obviously an evil drug manufacuter, ready to get "the kids" hooked on whatever boogyman is currently being played on the US news. Their army's sent in, you're killed while "resisting arrest". Then the people you were trying to help let out a big cheer. Some people realize what's going on, but lose interest once another runaway bride sweeps the nation.

I'd say a better way is to sell yourself out to another large government, assuming you could find one sympathetic to your cause. Or at least one hungry to be on the edge of the next scientific revolution. You'd have to worry about them stabbing you in the back of course, but it's better than trying to play with the wolves armed only with your fists.

[johngdonnelly]

Preventing one from living the full duration of life is the same as murder.

Yes, it is. Abortion is murder, and im glad you agree. Id have been totally pissed off if i had been murdered by my own mother because she couldn't be arsed looking after me.

[werty8472]

If it did become illigal, you'd see twenty years afterwards that no one in congress or political power was getting older.

[biknut]

The way the question is framed i'd have to vote no. I couldn't kill my own father for stopping me from taking a immortality pill.

[dale]

if i was being stopped from becoming immortal i dont know if i would take to fighting right away. i mean if i want to become immortal i dont want to go and get myself killed. i also wouldnt want to kill another because that is pointless. if i dont want to die why should i kill someone else.

immortality would be made to prevent death not to encourage it. if other people were willing to fight to the death to stop immortality then obviously they havent advanced far enough to respect life and almost dont deserve eternal life. but in the end you cant deny them it or else you would become the them in the process.

[Brainbox]

I would not fight literally. But I would try to use my (tiny) influence.

Note that this is already happening and that existing limitations are being increased by governmental organisations.

See for a critical view on codex and EU regulatory threats the website of the Alliance for Natural Heath.

I do not have the time right now to read all the contributions to this thread, I will do that later.




Edit: It seems this (to) quick reaction is a bit out of place here. Anyway, it may have it's uses.....

Edited by brainbox, 03 April 2006 - 10:07 PM.

[Dream]

If there was such a thing as the immortality pill, I would use whatever means I could to take it. There are ethical issues involved here. For example, I might persuade myself that under very specific circumstances murder is warranted to acheive this goal, but to have a nuclear war over the issue is not.

After that, I would focus on maintaining my immortal status, using whatever means I could. I would have to get a bit smarter and much wealthier to ensure that I remained immortal if a major world government decided that it was going to hunt me down and make me mortal (or dead). Quality of life is an issue here. I might have to learn to enjoy living in a constant state of paranoia.

[AdamDavis]

I would not fight under any circumstances...I would walk away and search for an alternative path to Immortality, my ultimate dream.

[Athanasios]

Are there things worth dying for?

I would have to quote gandhi on this one. "For this cause I am willing to die, but there is no cause so great, that I would be willing to kill".

P.S. In the other thread, I would kill one to save 5, if all else was the same. Or if you prefer, save 5 over the one.

Edited by cnorwood19, 23 July 2006 - 07:27 PM.

[JohnDoe1234]

I would be willing to fight for it, I would rather render them unconscious instead of killing them, but if it was family... I couldn't fight them...