50 years from now, 50 years ago
Pages
| Author | Topic: 50 years from now, 50 years ago |
|---|---|
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 15:09
Profile
Homepage
quote:And thus you're reducing life to something that can be bought... which just seems twisted to me. The way I see it, life extending treatments shouldn't be developed, particularly when it nears immortality. It's just asking for trouble... (note: In this context, I just mean treatments that prolong human life past the point where a person would die of "natural causes," i.e. not a disease. Life extensions for the pure sake of living longer are a bit worthless and unethical... as Dikiyoba said, who wants to live that long anyway?) Vote anti-immortality today! -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 15:19
Profile
Homepage
If you were too broke to afford immortality though, you could get a whopping big loan and pay it off over the next 200 years. :) I could get into the actual debate, but don't think I'll bother. [ Tuesday, February 28, 2006 15:21: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Fire! Fire! Fire! Fire!
Member # 919
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 18:52
Profile
...on a lighter note, welcome back, Undine! As a matter of fact, I was wondering a week or so ago where you'd gone and if you were coming back. I'm glad to see that you have. Polaris is at www.polarisboard.net/board, in case you're looking for it. -------------------- And though the musicians would die, the music would live on in the imaginations of all who heard it. -The Last Pendragon Polaris = joy. In case of emergency, break glass. Posts: 3351 | Registered: Saturday, April 6 2002 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 464
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 19:44
Profile
People keep talking about how horrible this world is and yet they want to live in it for eternity... Thanks Lady Davida, yeah I was somewhat wondering where Polaris is now that I'm somewhat back. Yet I haven't had time for forums for a long time. I'll check in there anyways. -------------------- You go girl! All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a philosopher. - Ambrose Bierce If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. Posts: 1158 | Registered: Monday, December 31 2001 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 20:57
Profile
Homepage
quote:But what counts as a natural cause? Infections are every bit as natural as old age -- modern medicine and public health measures are no less "unnatural" than whatever methods we may discover in future to extend our life expectancy further. Why would doubling our life expectancy from 80 to 160 (as we may do in the future) be any worse than doubling it from 40 to 80 (as we've already done)? And once we've reached 160, why not 320? 640? 1280? If someone is still enjoying life so much that she wants to live as long as possible, what's so terribly wrong with that? If you, personally, don't want to live forever, I doubt that anybody will force you to. [ Tuesday, February 28, 2006 20:58: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 21:47
Profile
Homepage
Drat. I knew that the discussion would turn thusly, and I tried to avoid it... I acknowledge that "natural causes" is a very strange term. But I mean stuff on the order of cancer or ebola as "unnatural". Basically, I mean quiet deaths versus violent ones. I'd be more worried about people exploiting their ability to live forever... think of corrupt CEOs who would never retire or die, for example. I honestly don't know, I guess... I just think that it's an idea ripe for exploitation. On an unrelated note, anyone notice the recent appearance of fresh titles? -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, February 28 2006 23:07
Profile
Homepage
Personally, I can't support the view that it's OK for people to die as long as they do so quietly. As for CEOs, well, if they can keep their jobs for centuries without their shareholders voting them out or their company going out of business, they're obviously doing something right. [ Tuesday, February 28, 2006 23:09: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6403
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 01:12
Profile
quote:You're quoting me out of context, which, while being a very useful propaganda tool, is utterly ridiculous here where everyone could see what I said. I didn't say that life can or should be bought. What I said was that something you weren't born with (and you are born with life, otherwise you wouldn't be around to think long enough to have an opinion on anything,) can and should be bought. Just like any surgery, which extends your life from what it would have been without the surgury, is bought. A life-extending medicine, which extends your life from what it would have been without it should also be bought. quote:I can understand not wanting to age forever, but eternal youth is something I'd find very useful. quote:FYT [ Wednesday, March 01, 2006 01:37: Message edited by: Infernal666hate ] -------------------- ??? ?????? ???? ????? Posts: 883 | Registered: Wednesday, October 19 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 01:28
Profile
Homepage
quote:Wow, you've been gone so long you don't remember him as Sir David anymore? o_o -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 11:59
Profile
Homepage
Nevermind. Just... nevermind. I don't think I even know what I'm trying to say... maybe I'll try again one day when I've got it completely figured out. -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 464
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 17:49
Profile
quote:lol Don't worry Aran I remember him as Sir David. I was actually debating on whether to call him that or his present name. -------------------- You go girl! All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a philosopher. - Ambrose Bierce If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. Posts: 1158 | Registered: Monday, December 31 2001 08:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 21:47
Profile
Homepage
I'll be sparse. quote:Yes, assuming that you can't stay alive any other way. To deny a starving person a pizza is cruelty (although let's hope the pizza isn't corporate dreck). quote:There is a line at which "free trade" surpasses meritocracy. This argument is WAY beyond that line. quote:So you think that a cure for death should only belong to the rich? (And heck, wouldn't that just allow them to get richer?) What merit does "they bought it" give, anyway? quote:Bad argument. Your parents can give you a car. Or you can live on the streets without a home, at which place a car is the least of your concerns. quote:Okay, I know you're joking, but still- that would just mean that you become a slave to creditors for an infinitely long period of time. quote:Yep. It's called "ripping off cheap labor." quote:Yes. Like education, transportation, housing assistance, et cetera... (Hint- these are all things that the gov't espouses [although doesn't come through on] as being things which people should be given as their right.) If you're arguing that people shouldn't be given any gov't assistance, then the scenario of classism plays itself out- the rich nuptualize their sons into positions of power and usurp everyone else. If you're arguing that people should be forcefully reduced back to nothing and should start from there, I'd still be curious as to how a kid could be raised without parents, but my primary concern is how the heck the kid will manage to buy anything that isn't provided. (I guess I'm just mentioning this notion for posterity- I'm not assuming that you believe in absurdities, just massively repugnant and genocidal reactionaryism.) I guess what I'm saying is, either you give immortality to everyone... or you give it to only those who can buy it, in which case you limit it to those who are wealthy, in which case you are essentially declaring that lower classes should die while upper class elitists should not. That is, without the slightest bit of exaggeration, a holocaust. -------------------- * Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 22:47
Profile
Homepage
quote:Okay, so this sucks. Has anything else actually worked better so far? It's necessary for you to seriously consider and address the possibility that humanity is in fact inherently and irreparably horrible, and that the best anyone can hope for is to stay at the top of the heap instead of the bottom. [ Wednesday, March 01, 2006 22:55: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 04:34
Profile
Homepage
quote:No caveman said that to her/himself before making fire (or, I suppose, having it given to her/him). Dude, you fight diseases even though "nothing else has actually worked better so far" other than letting people die. quote:Why is it "necessary?" You mean to say that defeatism is not only correct, but must be given into? But when you believe in defeatism, aren't you bound to be defeated, and dare-I-say act in the way that your beliefs prescribe? Such reasoning is pretzel logic at best, caustic at worst. Or, I suppose, it can be put this way- I have seen people do both good and evil things that do or do not benefit those who do them multiple times. I am not convinced that humanity is inherently much of anything on a moral level. The evil people just happen to be a great deal louder nowadays (and especially louder in the u.s.). -------------------- * Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 08:05
Profile
Homepage
I think Thuryl questions "the rich nuptualize their sons into positions of power and usurp everyone else." It sounds bad, but is there a system that works better? Works, mind you. Treating diseases works. Alleviating symptoms works when the disease can't be treated. Government assistance helps keep the gap between rich and poor smaller than in might be, but it won't get rid of it. —Alorael, who should know what suggestions to expect from TM. Still, for the enlightenment of Spiderweb, it has to be asked. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 08:17
Profile
Supposing we only gave immortality to the poor, they would thereby become the new rich, since they would possess an asset for which most people would pay anything. In other words, I think the morality of wealth and the morality of distributing immortality are rather arbitrarily associated in this thread. As far as wealth is concerned, we might just as well be discussing the distribution of lollipops. As far as immortality is concerned, giving it to some and not others is the issue, whoever the some may be. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 59
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 09:15
Profile
quote:In a thread where immortality and brain implants are discussed, the fundamental invincibility of capitalism is proclaimed. What a sweet irony. Posts: 950 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 10:22
Profile
Homepage
quote:I kinda see your point... but with the current system, I'd think that giving immortality to the poor would not make them the new rich, they'd just be poor for eternity. So distributing immortality would be different depending on the country in question. But how about the distribution of immortal lollipops? </ramble> This is pure conjecture, but I'd think that if the option for immortality were present (regardless of distribution and/or costs), murder and suicide rates would skyrocket for the country in question. Birth rates would stay the same (unless we're talking eternal youth), and overpopulation would get worse, to be counteracted said rise in killing. -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 59
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 22:47
Profile
Even if brainwashing all citizens to make them convinced socialists is not feasible, who says we can't emulate it with sufficiently powerful computers? You know, those quantum computers becoming faster at an ever-accelerating pace. Suppose we replace all CEOs of major corporations with little Deep Thoughts. If they can play chess better than humans, why can't they eventually make business decisions better than humans? Such a computer would have as inputs: 1. Laws directly from a government server to ensure it is more law-abiding than the liars and cheats currently in place. 2. Business data from its company. 3. Strategic goals from the owners. Oh, I'm sure it will really care about private ownership. ;) If almost all productive work is handled by machines, many arguments against equally distributed wealth - such as the motivational force of greed - become irrelevant, since the rich won't work anyway. [ Thursday, March 02, 2006 22:48: Message edited by: Alex ] Posts: 950 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 23:30
Profile
Homepage
TM, believing that the world sucks and isn't going to get much better in the foreseeable future is only "defeatism" if you care about making the world a better place. If that's not your goal, then you haven't been defeated if it turns out to be unachievable. We may therefore conclude that making the world a better place is a poor goal to pick for oneself. As always, Is is strong and Should is weak, and even to say that Should should be stronger is to show weakness. quote:Problems keep getting worse until they solve themselves, and then new problems arise. Such is the course of all human history. I can't wait to see what new and wonderful things are keeping everybody miserable 50 years from now. [ Thursday, March 02, 2006 23:33: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Friday, March 3 2006 06:13
Profile
Homepage
quote:The rich don't have to work to keep earning money. Stock market manipulation, for instance. quote:(First thing's first- I've never claimed that things will get "much better in the foreseeable future," although I will say that if it's possible to do so, we should at least try.) But fine- If the world is irretrievable, then you're right. However, I'm not entirely convinced of this yet. Plus, if I entertain that assumption, it justifies far too much far too easily. quote:Okay, let's suppose it is a poor goal (although I'd just as well argue that the benefits outweigh the risks). What better goals are there? quote:Show weakness? What, we mustn't falter against the enemy or something? I'm just not convinced of this point. If it doesn't fall under "should," then what purpose is there to it? quote:Probably the same things in a more clever disguise- as the course of all human history. (Like, I dunno, an ideology that changing the course of human history is impossible.) -------------------- * Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Friday, March 3 2006 06:28
Profile
Homepage
There will always be problems. Even if we do make the world a better place, then we will find other problems to be miserable about. Then, when we solve these problems, somebody will find even more problems, until there are no problems anymore, for as far this is possible. then people will get miserable because they have nothing to keep them busy. Everything is solved anyway. Now I don't say we shouldn't try to make the world a better place, I only say humanity is in some terms quite pathetic. One of these terms is the ability to always find problems, doesn't matter how petty or irrelevant. This reminds me of a discussion I had yesterday, and it is not entirely off-topic. About having a goal in life. that is quite a problem, a goal, I mean. people generally feel two things about a goal, depending on their present situation. With having a goal, this means: Reached your goalNot reached your goalNow, if we take a person in his fifties, then he will feel in these two ways, in the same order a sabove, about his goal: He will be depressed because he reached his goal, and can't find anything else to do.He will hate himself and be depressed because he didn't manage to achieve his goal.(Note that this can also occur on earlier ages, but it will start at an age of about 35.) Is it good to have a goal in life then? or will you be depressed because you feel bored and don't know what to do. As I see it, in all manners, a person could become depressed, no matter what he does. Of course, some people have a normal life, retire, and live happily ever after. -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Friday, March 3 2006 12:19
Profile
Homepage
quote:I may be taking this wrong, but I'm sensing that you think it's somewhere between difficult and impossible for a person to have any pride in the life they've lived. Either that, or this went in a circle. Anybody else read this and get a deep sense of defeatism? -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3980
|
written Friday, March 3 2006 12:46
Profile
Homepage
Re previous post: I cannot make head or tail of it. Goals change over the years and why should I be depressed about chances I took and pipe dreams that I dropped? quote:1. I object to the inflationary use of the word holocaust. Look it up in wikipedia and show a list of similarities and differences if you insist. 2. About poverty being associated with lower life expectancy we do not have to talk about the distant future but just look at present facts - and I do not even mean the obvious comparison between rich and poor nations. Take the U.K. for example. quote:The problem is not only that drugs are expensive but that improvement of medical knowledge tends to widen health disparities. The middle classes are amazingly adept at pouncing on every new snippet of information about healthy lifestyles and incorporating it into their daily activities. Overweight and smoking as well as TV-time per day are indicators for low socioeconomic status. Are you serious about calling this the "holocaust" of relative stupidity or relative lack of self-discipline? Eaxmple: Intellectual and physical activity delay the onset of Morbus Alzheimer. So what are "we" to do to help the poor couch potatos watching TV all day to prevent them from becoming dependent Alzheimer patients? [sarcasm]The present way out is to have them "enjoy life" and smoke and gain weight so they die in time which is more ethical than putting them on methamphetamine.[/sarcasm] What other remedy do you have on offer? [ Friday, March 03, 2006 13:20: Message edited by: No 2 Methylphenidate ] -------------------- The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference. Because of indifference, one dies before one actually dies. (not mine) Posts: 311 | Registered: Friday, February 13 2004 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Friday, March 3 2006 13:17
Profile
Homepage
Eh. I'd make a reply to TM, but my depressive phase is ending. Since I'm no longer able to preach despair effectively now that I'm relatively content again, I'm bowing out of this discussion. I'll be away for the next couple of days anyway, so I wouldn't be able to continue it for a while even if I were inclined to do so. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |