Living Forever: What would you want to do?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dlgoff
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of living forever and what individuals would choose to do with the extra time. Participants explore various implications of immortality, including personal aspirations, societal impacts, and philosophical considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a desire to learn mathematics and physics to understand reality better.
  • Several participants criticize Aubrey De Gray, labeling him as a "crackpot" and questioning the scientific basis of his ideas on immortality.
  • There are differing views on the potential for boredom over an extended lifespan, with some arguing that new experiences and careers would prevent boredom, while others suggest that repetitive activities could become tedious.
  • Concerns are raised about overpopulation if everyone were to live forever, with some suggesting that birth rates would decline in such a scenario.
  • One participant suggests that living forever could lead to a lack of purpose or fulfillment, while another counters that there would always be new things to explore and learn.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the feasibility of true immortality, suggesting that accidents could still lead to death despite advances in medical science.
  • There are humorous and imaginative responses about the implications of immortality, including creating ideal companions or experiencing life as a "freak" among evolved humans.
  • One participant reflects on the vast amount of literature available and the potential for endless learning as a way to fill time in an immortal life.
  • Another participant discusses the idea of splitting time between survival-focused activities and pleasure-seeking once basic safety is assured.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach consensus, with multiple competing views on the implications of living forever, the potential for boredom, and the feasibility of immortality itself. Disagreements persist regarding the societal impacts of immortality and the nature of existence over an indefinite lifespan.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about human behavior in response to immortality, the definition of living forever, and the unresolved implications of overpopulation and societal structure in such a scenario.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in philosophical discussions about immortality, societal implications of extended lifespans, and the interplay between personal aspirations and existential questions may find this discussion engaging.

dlgoff
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,458
Reaction score
3,265
So if this become a reality, what would you like to use the extra time for?

I'll start. Learning the Mathematics and Physics needed to understand how reality works.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Aubrey De Gray is a crackpot.
 
Evo said:
Aubrey De Gray is a crackpot.

Regardless, Aubrey De Gray is a cool name.
 
If I could live forever, I would do EVERYTHING.
 
Aubrey De Gray is a crackpot, not least because his devotion to the idea is fanatical rather than based on much science. Saying that though regenerative medicines have great potentially to increase lifespans; liver failing? get a new one. Lung collapsed? get a new one. Skin wrinkly? get a new one.

If my healthy lifespan was considerably increased I would consider working for several decades putting a good fraction of my salary away each pay day so that I could go traveling around the world for years on end.
 
Assuming you could overcome the problems caused by the burgeoning human population,such as reducing living spaces and food supplies then I guess that as the years pass just one of several effects would be that you would become increasingly disenchanted and tired through boredom.
 
Dadface said:
Assuming you could overcome the problems caused by the burgeoning human population,such as reducing living spaces and food supplies then I guess that as the years pass just one of several effects would be that you would become increasingly disenchanted and tired through boredom.

IMO if anything the birthrate would decline. In most first world countries the birthrate has massively decreased (thanks to contraception and women's rights). Add into the mix the expectancy to live for hundreds/thousands of years and why would anyone think of having kids within their first century or so?

I also don't see boredom as a possibility (unless one suffers from a lack of imagination). You can always retrain and try a new career for a few decades, not to mention that new things to do are always being invented. Just a mere century ago people couldn't travel globally, sky dive, chat online etc etc.
 
ryan_m_b said:
IMO if anything the birthrate would decline. In most first world countries the birthrate has massively decreased (thanks to contraception and women's rights). Add into the mix the expectancy to live for hundreds/thousands of years and why would anyone think of having kids within their first century or so?

I also don't see boredom as a possibility (unless one suffers from a lack of imagination). You can always retrain and try a new career for a few decades, not to mention that new things to do are always being invented. Just a mere century ago people couldn't travel globally, sky dive, chat online etc etc.

My comments were based on the concept of everyone living forever.If that were the case the population would approach infinity even for a birthrate approaching the vanishingly small. Also,every individual could experience every activity an increasing number of times which approached infinity as the years passed.Sky diving is fun but I can imagine it starts to get tedious after the ten millionth jump,especially when the adrenaline element is reduced by the knowledge that the jump can not result in death.
 
Dadface said:
My comments were based on the concept of everyone living forever.If that were the case the population would approach infinity even for a birthrate approaching the vanishingly small. Also,every individual could experience every activity an increasing number of times which approached infinity as the years passed.Sky diving is fun but I can imagine it starts to get tedious after the ten millionth jump,especially when the adrenaline element is reduced by the knowledge that the jump can not result in death.

I would agree were it not for the false premise of the OP, whilst biological immortality may be entirely possible through medical science at some point some accident will kill you
 
  • #10
ryan_m_b said:
I would agree were it not for the false premise of the OP, whilst biological immortality may be entirely possible through medical science at some point some accident will kill you

I think the whole idea is daft and I'm not taking any of it seriously:smile:
 
  • #11
Drakkith said:
If I could live forever, I would do EVERYTHING.

Dadface said:
as the years pass just one of several effects would be that you would become increasingly disenchanted and tired through boredom.

Following the Drakkith program, when you were finished doing everything, you'd have no less days to spend than when you first begun. The Dadface phenomenon would occur.
 
  • #12
Evo said:
Aubrey De Gray is a crackpot.

OMG. I cleaned up the post.
 
  • #13
If it were guaranteed that I'd live forever? Kill all humans.
 
  • #14
Forever? No, forever's a ridiculously long time. I would not want to outlive Sol. I think I'd be happy with 1,000 years of life. I'd be mainly interested in observing technological progress and new discoveries.
 
  • #15
If nobody dies then nobody could be born. Would you want to live forever if there was no procreation, no children?
 
  • #16
I'd prefer not to spend the course of human history stuck inside a rock, or after having fun on Earth with people for 0.0[insert 0s here]1% of my lifetime to drift through space doing apsolutely nothing for the rest.

Even if humans survived for a million years (which would be a great outcome for an immortal person), you'd be one hell of a freak to all the other evolved humans.

I think this is a great read, put things in perspective in a first person humourus way: http://everything2.com/user/santo/writeups/Immortality+blows
 
  • #17
It's probable that I would become some Vandal Savage or I'd live on some planet and create the perfect woman that could accompany me throughout eternity.
 
  • #18
Anyway I've plenty of time in hand, why do I have to plan something?
 
  • #19
I suppose if there was nothing that could ever kill me I would spend my time trying to avoid the heat death. But I'd probably just bum around for 10100 years and do an all nighter just before.
 
  • #20
Greg Bear treats this in some of his stories. There is seriously a hell of a lot to do. How many books are there out there to read? How many more are published each year? If you took some time to learn other languages just how many more books would you have access to? I could probably spend hundreds of years on reading alone. If you would seriously get bored in less than a couple thousand years then I pity your lack of imagination.
 
  • #21
I take that "Living Forever" means that I live for an indefinite time (i.e I can't die of old age but a truck can still kill me)

I'd split my time in two halves. First half I'd still try to maximize my probability of survival. Second half, I'd do anything that pleases me. It's pretty much what I do now. Annihilation of old age is just like annihilation of a disease, so nothing would really change, people will still die and overpopulation could be controlled by regulations for people deciding to go Highlander. I'd be cool though to live like that for thousands of years, or even until absorbed by Multivac :P

If we take "Living Forever" to literally mean unable to die (not even by heat-death somehow), then I'm not sure if this is a situation that one wants to be in. It'd be a never-ending evolution and it could end up being in a state of constant pain, but unable to die to relieve it! A bad fate. I guess I'd still split my time in two, and the first half would be spent to maximize the probability of avoiding unwanted discomfort (the second as above!).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 142 ·
5
Replies
142
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
8K