What if something was invented that can freeze our age?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LennoxLewis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Age
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical concept of a technology that could "freeze" aging, inspired by media representations of a child with a developmental disorder and the biological properties of certain jellyfish. Participants explore the implications of such a technology on society, population dynamics, and existential considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the media portrayal of aging, suggesting that the notion of a child who does not age is misleading and rooted in sensationalism.
  • There are concerns about the potential for overpopulation if aging could be halted, with suggestions that measures such as sterilization might be implemented to manage population growth.
  • Others propose that the process of extending life spans would be gradual, allowing for societal adjustments to prevent catastrophic overpopulation.
  • One participant raises the philosophical question of whether a life without aging would lead to ennui and a lack of purpose, comparing it to a perpetual cycle without growth.
  • There is a claim that aging cannot be completely frozen, as time and change are inherent to existence, and that any advancements would likely take a long time to develop.
  • Some participants speculate that even with advancements in life extension, many individuals may still succumb to natural causes or accidents, suggesting that not everyone would benefit equally from such technology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a range of competing views regarding the implications of halting aging, with no consensus reached on the desirability or feasibility of such a technology. Concerns about societal impacts and individual outcomes are debated without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of aging and the potential for various outcomes depending on societal responses to life extension technologies. There are unresolved questions about the ethical and practical implications of such advancements.

LennoxLewis
Messages
129
Reaction score
1
This story inspired this thread:

http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=6906

If you ask me, the media is misrepresenting this case which is really a poor, unhealthy child with an extraordinary development disorder... they think that no development means no aging, but i'd be surprised if she lives past the age of 30. She escaped death several times.

Of course, sensationalism beats factual reporting every day of the week, hence she's being dubbed as the one who doesn't age...


Then i read about this article of a jellyfish that can inverse its aging:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/4357829/Immortal-jellyfish-swarming-across-the-world.html


So, what would happen if humanity invented some way to do this? Of course, one would still age in a mental sense, and considering my life contained more "thrills" when i was younger, I'm not sure if this is even desirable in the first place, but I'm sure once its invented, it can't be undone. Would it destroy Earth because of overpopulation?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Im sure there would be measures in place to limit populations, not limited to sterilisation (as long as you had some of the stuff frozen - just in case).

Also god would become quite furious, what with no one entering heaven.
 
Blenton said:
Also god would become quite furious, what with no one entering heaven.


:biggrin:

No one would enter Hell either then, though... perhaps it would drive God 'n Satan to combine powers to regain us?!
 
The process of extending our life spans and staving off the aging process will I think be gradual, not sudden. People will be living longer and longer, the birth rate will be decreasing, and it's not unreasonable to think we will achieve an equilibrium before any disasterous overpopulation effects occur.

One thing that I don't like is that people already take unexpected deaths too seriously, and with this technology there is more to be lost when someone is killed by accident, murder, etc and these events will be taken even more seriously than they already are.

One positive effect would be if children become so rare that they are shared by the community i.e. do not belong to only one pair of biological parents.
 
Blenton said:
Im sure there would be measures in place to limit populations, not limited to sterilisation (as long as you had some of the stuff frozen - just in case).

Also god would become quite furious, what with no one entering heaven.

That would be a bad move. He's already been in a really bad mood since 1984 ... which would explain the Spice Girls.
 
Last edited:
What if something was invented that can freeze our age?

That would certainly be a Hell of a sort wouldn't it?

A perpetual Groundhog Day?

Life is predicated on growth and reproduction.

The final prospect of a life would be waiting for the sun to expand to engulf earth?

Wouldn't the ennui become a trifle dreadful?

Shouldn't the Social Security Trust Fund be a little strengthened first?
 
Aging cannot be frozen. Time passes and change occurs, thus aging can either be slowed down or reversed, not halted without alteration.

We know aging can be slowed down, there is abundant data on genetics, nutrition and life expectancy. Can it be reversed not in theory but within scientific means? I suspect so but I doubt it matters. If it can it will take a long time to achieve in full, by which point there will be far better alternatives for sustained existence, alternatives within which there are no meaningful issues of population, economics or even resources.

And of course the headline there is transparently idiotic. The kid has development problems but she is certainly aging, and will likely be dead before any of us.
 
I doubt living for longer periods of time will qualify for everyone. We will still have Darwin awards and people dieing of things like heart disease because they are to stupid to take care of themselves. The only thing that would change is people would look younger and a select few would live for very long periods of time.
 

Similar threads

On medical materialism and the value of subjective experience
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K