• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Immortality

tysonrss

Keyblade Master
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Location
OH, USA
Before laughing at the title of the thread just think about it. I have been for awhile wondering if it's possible, and through science it just might. Through medicines or something maybe. I read that a Russian scientist says it may be possible in 30 years.

To be honest, I don't see the need as life is full of pain and misery already, why suffer for an eternity? Then there is the possibility of someone wanting this sort of power to rule. Though that's just being hypothetical. Though if immortality somehow did become possible, I'm sure there would be many other possibilities as well, and this one reason why I have an interest in Science, to see if the unknown can be made possible.

There is still so much for us to learn and humans have a certain power within that can really only be unlocked through that humans lifespan, the fundalmental powers of Ki. I'm not saying we can fire large Kamehameha's or anything but I do believe human's have a certain mysterious power as I have once felt it before in the palm of my hand. It may sound bizarre but it is true, rather if people believe me or not. It wasn't so simple as I had to be calm and meditation was key, in which after being successful my hand felt like it was on fire for 5 mins. But that's the beyond the scope of the topic.

Do you guys think immortality is possible through science? What about other things as well such as unlocking the full potential of us humans? To me personally I think if such a thing became possible this world would be going to hell in a hand basket, but is just my opinion, still is interesting to talk about nonetheless.

Discuss.
 

Majora's Cat

How about that
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Location
NJ
The idea of a form of immortality that extends a human's consciousness beyond the typical life span is intriguing. There have to be significant drawbacks, though. Even if a human can operate an avatar, the brain would still deteriorate.

When talking about Avatar B, if a person was to have his/her personality transferred near the end of his/her life, then that person's memory is already in a less-than-ideal state and will only continue to worsen. At an elderly age, people suffer from several diseases and are generally less healthy than they used to be. An avatar body frees them from the constraints and vulnerabilities of a human body, but that may not be able to stop any ailments affecting the brain if the brain is physically transplanted into an avatar. The brain's capacity and aptitude to store information would worsen over time until there may be a point where you cannot remember anything.

Avatar C is completely different, since a person's consciousness and memories are not housed in a human brain. This seems like more of a stretch, because the conversion of a person's conscience from a human to an artificial brain is a nebulous concept as of now. I'm also unsure of how successful this would be, or if you can even consider the avatar and conscience a "human being" anymore, since there is no human brain. Whether or not that counts as immortality depends on what we think constitutes the existence of a human.

Itskov is doing a daring thing here, and even if the research and development bears fruit, only the remarkably wealthy would be able to afford the treatment. Human immortality may become possible to an extent, but who knows when it will be accessible to the common people?
 

Xinnamin

Mrs. Austin
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Location
clustercereal
There has never been a sliver of doubt in my mind that immortality will someday be possible. There has also never been a sliver of doubt in my mind that such a development would be unacceptable.

Insofar as that specific article goes, Majora's Cat sums it up pretty well. Avatars A and B are not immortal, as the brain is still aging. Avatars C and D are not human, as it may as well just be an advanced computer program at that point.

On the subject of immortality becoming a reality, and I've no doubt it one day will in some form or another, it opens a world of problems. Until "immortality" becomes available to the public, those few who can afford it will be ostracized by the rest of the mortal society. When it does become available to the public, social order as it currently exists will be upended. This says nothing about the turmoil of the years between or leading up to, and only scratches the surface of the overall global and historical implications. What will happen to the concept of family and children, for one?

The quest for immortality is one of the only areas of science to which I would turn my back.
 

tysonrss

Keyblade Master
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Location
OH, USA
I think what Majora said is correct, immortality wouldn't really be possible now that I think about it as the human brain ages unless of course in the future, medicines would be created or something to help keep the brain healthy and kicking...as for the link I posted, even those doesn't seem like "real" immortality as it doesn't seem that, that one person is actually themself. Creating a artificial brain or some avatar and transplanting the brain over isn't immortality in a sense as teh original person will still fade away.

Immortality will never be truely possible.
 

Sir Quaffler

May we meet again
Insofar as the immortality as presented in the article, I'm not a fan of it. It doesn't seem like true immortality to me, as the transfer of consciousness seems dubious at best, and the transfer of souls is impossible. (That's all I'll say about that, since the question of whether souls really exist is a topic for another discussion.) Also, if I have to rely on swapping out all my biological parts for mechanical ones, can I really call it living?

Now, as to the question of true immortality, in that I can continue to live in my body indefinitely, that's a bit more intriguing. They would need to solve the dilemma of keeping the brain from deteriorating, but if this technology can drastically expand our lifespans then I'm all for it. Humans used to live much longer lives, and I'd like to get back to that. Not live in this world for a true infinity, but if I can live for hundreds of years that'll be sweet.

By the way the probability of living forever without any horrible accidents that would render immortality useless are statistically zero. If someone lives long enough, the probability of them being trapped under rubble or becoming comatose are basically 100%. This is the one saving grace death has, in that it stops suffering, and I don't want that to go away.
 

tysonrss

Keyblade Master
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Location
OH, USA
Insofar as the immortality as presented in the article, I'm not a fan of it. It doesn't seem like true immortality to me, as the transfer of consciousness seems dubious at best, and the transfer of souls is impossible. (That's all I'll say about that, since the question of whether souls really exist is a topic for another discussion.) Also, if I have to rely on swapping out all my biological parts for mechanical ones, can I really call it living?

Now, as to the question of true immortality, in that I can continue to live in my body indefinitely, that's a bit more intriguing. They would need to solve the dilemma of keeping the brain from deteriorating, but if this technology can drastically expand our lifespans then I'm all for it. Humans used to live much longer lives, and I'd like to get back to that. Not live in this world for a true infinity, but if I can live for hundreds of years that'll be sweet.

By the way the probability of living forever without any horrible accidents that would render immortality useless are statistically zero. If someone lives long enough, the probability of them being trapped under rubble or becoming comatose are basically 100%. This is the one saving grace death has, in that it stops suffering, and I don't want that to go away.
I doubt anyne would want to live longer then 100 years, I sure wouldn't...more pain and youre more brittle.
 

Kirino

leslie/draco
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Location
USA
I doubt anyne would want to live longer then 100 years, I sure wouldn't...more pain and youre more brittle.
Life is full of pain and misery? Why suffer for an eternity? What a view. To me at least, life has way more happiness than pain. If you ask me, there's no happiness to be found in death. No peace either. I hope to stay alive as long as possible. Immortality would probably be too much, but if I could really extend my life that far, I would definitely do it.
 

elliotstriforce

trollin for booty
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Location
somewhere.
i see the concept of immortality as just a way to get people's hopes up and make them look for a reason to want to live forever, they are fighting a fear that is inevitable in all humans. i don't believe anyone that claims that there is a way. our cells will stop regenerating one day and we will all rot away physically and mentally. thats my opinion on the topic.
 

Garo

Boy Wonder
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Location
Behind you
The concept of immortality intrigues me not from a scientific or even personal standpoint, but rather from a societal one. We have population problems as is - death is a wonderful, natural limitation for our population. Eliminating the chance of death for even only a fraction of the population who can afford the assuredly costly immortality measures? Now that would be interesting. Would population explode and leave the lower classes to die of starvation and disease as the cities become overcrowded and grow outward? Would the government implement population control measures? Would people rise up against the newly tyrannical government? Who would be in the right, and who in the wrong?

Intriguing.
 

Curmudgeon

default setting: sarcastic prick
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Gender
grumpy
The concept of immortality intrigues me not from a scientific or even personal standpoint, but rather from a societal one. We have population problems as is - death is a wonderful, natural limitation for our population. Eliminating the chance of death for even only a fraction of the population who can afford the assuredly costly immortality measures? Now that would be interesting. Would population explode and leave the lower classes to die of starvation and disease as the cities become overcrowded and grow outward? Would the government implement population control measures? Would people rise up against the newly tyrannical government? Who would be in the right, and who in the wrong?

Intriguing.
I read a novel recently that attempted to tackle such a question (The Postmortal by Drew Magary). In the book, a cure for aging, and eventually one for most disease is discovered. I'm not sure if I buy the scenario presented, but it did bring up a lot of interesting societal questions - what happens to the marriage vow "until death do us part" when monogamy really can last forever? How does society cope when the population becomes to large to effectively manage or even care for?

Really though, the whole fascination with immortality is naturally human and can be found in virtually every mythology produced by humankind. We're mortal, and are intrigued by the idea that we can cheat the inevitable. The mythology of immortality, just like many motivations of man, is a selfish one.
 

Castle

Ch!ld0fV!si0n
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Location
Crisis? What Crisis?
Gender
Pan-decepticon-transdeliberate-selfidentifying-sodiumbased-extraexistential-temporal anomaly
Immortality has many wide ranging implications. Sociological, historical, ecological, economical, political, philosophical. If immortality is achieved by essentially copying ones conscience then in which one resides the person? Does it matter? What exactly is it that defines us? Our minds? Our bodies? Our souls? Our personalities and memories? If there are two of us, are we individuals? From the moment our duplicate goes off and starts living its own life and doing its own things, it's no longer like us is it? It is its own individual with different experiences, even if it has common origins. Born of ourselves, so to speak.

The Earth survives off a cycle of life and death. Remove death and you break the cycle. This can result in far more than just environmental issues having to do with overpopulation. Human beings consume enough of Earth's resources as it is. The world just cannot provide its finite resources to sustain infinite life. It can support only so many cycles as it is.

Besides, destroy the conscious and you destroy the being. It doesn't matter how long the conscious can last. Take a hammer to it and it dies. Sure, you can safeguard against this, like copying files on to thumb drives, but only if you are able.

I don't think it's our bodies so much as our conscious that makes us what we are as individuals. Doesn't matter what form we take. As long as our conscious remains in tact, we are who we are. Even people with amnesia don't loose there conscious and thus their sense of self. Instead their sense of self simply changes. Destroying the conscious entirely is what results in death, imo.

But who wants to live forever? I sure as hell don't. The world is a hard enough place to live in as it is. I wouldn't want to have to suffer it for eternity. I have seen many geriatrics at the end of their lives just eager to pass on after all they've been through. Life is tiresome. It wears ya out. Mentally and physically.

Besides, the urgency that the promise of death provides serves as effective motivation. Every day spent idle is time spent not contributing to this great chain of life. Had I all the time in the world, I wouldn't have much incentive to live it.
 
Last edited:

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
But who wants to live forever? I sure as hell don't. The world is a hard enough place to live in as it is. I wouldn't want to have to suffer it for eternity.
Now don't take this the wrong way, but if this world is truly a suffering why do you (and others) simply not off yourselves now? I can understand why you wouldn't want to suffer an eternity, but why would you want to suffer for the 60-80 years you have left? I can assure you, it only gets worse. Particularly as your pass into your old age.

Again, not suggesting you do it. Just asking why you haven't.
 

Moonstone

embrace the brand new day
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Now don't take this the wrong way, but if this world is truly a suffering why do you (and others) simply not off yourselves now? I can understand why you wouldn't want to suffer an eternity, but why would you want to suffer for the 60-80 years you have left? I can assure you, it only gets worse. Particularly as your pass into your old age.

Again, not suggesting you do it. Just asking why you haven't.

Because life, while difficult, can be truly amazing and wonderful as well. Sure, it can be hard and tiring, but that makes the good times all the better. Also, what's the point in giving up? I'd rather live to be 80 and struggle than give up and never know what my life had to offer me.

Also, survival instinct.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Location
Tournament Of Power Arena
Gender
Woman
Now don't take this the wrong way, but if this world is truly a suffering why do you (and others) simply not off yourselves now? I can understand why you wouldn't want to suffer an eternity, but why would you want to suffer for the 60-80 years you have left? I can assure you, it only gets worse. Particularly as your pass into your old age.

Again, not suggesting you do it. Just asking why you haven't.
Because then I wouldn't get to play Pokemon X and Y, or Super Smash Bros 4, or whatever games come after those. Video games keep me going.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom