NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey everyone,

I've decided to bring up an incredibly delicate, existential, issue. Is immortality all that great? I know, I know, we all see vampires and ghosts in the movies and think "ooh, sweet, that would rock!" But would it? Would it really be that great? I contest that it would be awful...I mean, I saw that "WALL-E" movie and felt bad for the main-character (a lovable garbage-bot) because he would be doomed to live an eternity (or a LONG time at any rate, due to advances in robot quality) with an uncannily 'human' sense of social longing (luckily, the movie turns out alright).

I feel human beings long for immortality for the wrong reasons. Immortality isn't appealing because we love life, it's appealing because we're terrified of death. What would anyone do with an eternity? Most of us already waste the 70-85 years we call a lifetime.

What do you think?

I think you need to read more science fiction. I couldn't count the number of sci-fi I've read that addressed this question. In fact, I'm in the middle of one, now.

For the record: The First Immortal by Halpen is relevant, but terrible.

I think you need to read more science fiction. I couldn't count the number of sci-fi I've read that addressed this question. In fact, I'm in the middle of one, now.

For the record: The First Immortal by Halpen is relevant, but terrible.

Thanks for the tip. I've read the Foundation series by Asimov, but for the most part I'm not a big 'sci-fi' guy.

Thanks for the tip. I've read the Foundation series by Asimov, but for the most part I'm not a big 'sci-fi' guy.

I can't stand Asimov, as it happens. He writes like a scientist, not like a writer.

At the moment I'm reading The Golden Age by Wright, but if you're not into sci-fi I wouldn't recommend it as it's hard sci-fi so it can be lengthily technically wordy at times. I haven't gotten very far into it, but immortality is one of the themes brought into question. Think 1984 set several million years from now and everyone is immortal because your body and brain are stored and you experience the world through a "mannequin" that transfers everything back to your brain as if it was really you. Also, almost all of your memory is recorded so if you DO die, they can just make you again.

Generally speaking, most sci-fi novels that have immortality point out that it would it would be pretty nifty, but tiresome and wearying after a while. One book, set around an ordinary-ish human, included a "race" of augmented humans that lived an extremely long (though not quite infinite) time, and they were described as boring, timid, and uncreative, basically because when you live that long all you get to caring about is living longer - which means being adventurous or creative is a bad idea, since it might get you killed. The except to the nifty but wearying theme would be The First Immortal which submits that it would be nothing but sunshine, rainbows, and niftiness for all eternity. But it's badly written so I wouldn't put much stock into that. Halpen is not a fantastic writer.

And then there's always the Futurama episode "Anthology of Interest II," the relevant part being Bender's vision of what it would be like if he were human: "Truly Bender has lived more in his seven days of being human than we have our entire lives." [paraphrased because I'm too lazy to look farther than Wikiquote to find the exact quote].

Read Heinlein's Methuselah's Children, To Sail Beyond Sunset, and anything that has Lazarus Long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah's_Children

I wouldn't have a problem with living a few hundred years, provided I stayed healthy and sane. Immortality might prove ultimately boring, though.

I will admit that one of the primary motivations I'd have for seeking immortality would be a fear of death and everything that goes with it. See, I've been dead and, while it was liberating and can be thought of as therapy, it was scrayer than viower excretion. Can you imagine a complete stop of all brain function? You know, the part that comes after the NDE phase of death? Not cool.

But more than the fear I think that I have a lot to contribute and to experience IRL.

I can't stand Asimov, as it happens. He writes like a scientist, not like a writer.

Funny that.

Yes I would like it mainly for the idea that I will be able to see how people react and what happens in the world, of course I would have like to have started 4000 years ago but still and have the body of young man so I can slip into almost any society and study them more closely.

Are we talkin' biological immortality or the mythical 'can't be killed ever' immortality?

I would go for biological immortality, because I could choose to end it if I was sick of living.

As far as I'm concerned now, I'd have no problem living forever. I like life, for all its ups and downs, and non-life (be it heaven, hell or oblivion) does not quite interest me, as yet. I don't really buy the whole "it would get really boring" stuff, either. Hell, even just looking at relatively familiar things but switching perspectives makes them wholly unfamiliar.

Immortality means an eternity to master all science and spread immortality to all humans.

I've read the Foundation series by Asimov
...
I'm not a big 'sci-fi' guy.

Figures. :D (Helluva wrong way to start on SF...)

But to the point: our limited minds cannot even begin to grasp the concept of immortality. Our idea about that is "to live a long time without aging or aching, in a world that doesn't change too dramatically (or only for the better)".

True eternality would be pretty hard to achieve in a matter based body anyway, regardless whether the universe will simply fade into oblivion or be bigcrunched back into nothingness.

creating and exploring gratify, trying to impress each other does not. living longer won't diminish or increase this being the case for either of them.

there's a big universe out there, so i don't think living forever would mean running out of places and ways of things working to explore. sublight transit times would no longer be a barrier certainly, even if ftl methodology were truely never found. creating of course we need to learn how to not destroy what our existence depends upon in doing so, but again, this is something we're quite capable of and not the real object an emotional attatchment to the familiar attepts to deny.

personally i would have little or no problem with living with little or no social contact, although i would most likely find friends among whatever other life forms i came in contact with.

i don't think i'd want to be forever arround people who'se idea of fun was to go arround shooting and stabing and poking each other's eye out because they knew they couldn't kill each other by doing so.

but a long way aways from that least social common denominator of popular attatchment to ignorance i could love eternity very much.

Depends on the 'type' of immortality.
If we're talking Necron-style, complete with having-your-soul-eaten and becoming a mindless robot, I'll pass, thank you :P

Speaking in a 'star child' kind of sense, I think it would be rather neat. I suppose it would really depend on your personality, however. It would be rather lonely.

I think that retaining a human body, while being otherwise indestructible, would be the most interesting way. Certainly you would eventually run out of places to go, but considering the rate at which the world changes, you would be hard pressed to actually be BORED.
Unless you got buried in concrete or lava or something...in which case being immortal might well be the worst kind of existence possible short of Hell itself.

I reckon it'd suck after a while, what with all the people you know and love constantly dying. It'd mess with your head a hell of a lot. You'd probably end up valuing human life a lot less than mortal people, especially since you could see first hand all the mistakes people in general make throughout history.

Seeing both WWI and WWII, for example (especially the trenches of the former and concentration camps of the latter) would definately damage your view of humanity in general.

Once one becomes immortal, does one loose the essential idea of humanity?

But then I imagine a lot of authors have touched on this sort of thing before.

the "essential idea of humanity" is horse shit.

also one does not loose one's soul. one IS one's 'soul'. to 'exist without it' is a self contradictory oxymoron.

what one might 'loose' is their physical life form, something currently, in all too few decades, just about the time we start to figure out how everything works, we all, or nearly all, appearently do.

i really don't see the limitations of a physical body making anything more interesting at all. if anything they seem more to be obsticals and distractions in the way of what is truely gratifying.

oh sure, there's sex to explore, but there's only just so much deversity of it to experience in any one single life form.

so screw that, there's that great big infinite as far as we can tell, and almost certainly as infinately or nearly infinitely diverse, universe out there to forever explore and create with and within.

and why take the question from an exclusively personal perspective?

i really don't get, see, any basis for the assumption, of one's immortality being unique.

so what if all personal relationships are inhierently temporary in a context of eternity. i guess it would all depend on what you live for and how you percieve existence. i don't know about anyone else, but i live in a world of geometry, texture, and to an extent geography, not one of humans society, human demographics, or personal relationships.

sure i love love, and love for eveyone else to be able to be happy too. but the happiest times in my own life, have always been when i was utterly and completely alone.

out there, beyond the plane of material limitations, it is my belief there are all kinds of imortal awairnessess. i hardly think any of us would find ourselves lonely among them.

It would suck having people constantly trying to decapitate me with a sword. :p

I can't stand Asimov, as it happens. He writes like a scientist, not like a writer.

At the moment I'm reading The Golden Age by Wright, but if you're not into sci-fi I wouldn't recommend it as it's hard sci-fi so it can be lengthily technically wordy at times. I haven't gotten very far into it, but immortality is one of the themes brought into question. Think 1984 set several million years from now and everyone is immortal because your body and brain are stored and you experience the world through a "mannequin" that transfers everything back to your brain as if it was really you. Also, almost all of your memory is recorded so if you DO die, they can just make you again.


ooh,hard scifi!if,you like hard scifi read ''Revelation Space'' by Alastair Reynolds.i like Asimov,athough i've read only a bit of Robots series and a bit Foundation series

Honestly, I think all the "see, it sucks to live forever" stories are just Sour Grapes. People can't live forever, so they say "well, who wants to anyway" to feel better about it.


That being said, if I lived forever, I would insult every person in the universe in alphabetical order. :D

Honestly, I think all the "see, it sucks to live forever" stories are just Sour Grapes. People can't live forever, so they say "well, who wants to anyway" to feel better about it.


That being said, if I lived forever, I would insult every person in the universe in alphabetical order. :D

you mean like in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?

I know, I know, we all see vampires and ghosts in the movies and think "ooh, sweet, that would rock!"
I don't think so. Walking hulk possessed by a demon, or a ghost bound to its old castle? No, that would suck.

But would it? Would it really be that great?
If it doesn't imply becoming a walking corpse, but rather stops/slows down aging at a reasonable amount - I don't even ask for eternal youth and perfect health, just not senile state of mind and body - then, at least for me, yes.

What would anyone do with an eternity? Most of us already waste the 70-85 years we call a lifetime.
But not all. I feel seriously short on time. There's so many things I want to do, but each takes at least a couple years of dedication, and I don't have enough to afford even 10% of the things I want to do.

500-900 years would still feel tight, but at least not as terribly short.

I'd have no problem with being immortal if I could choose at any moment, when, where, and how I wanted to die.

If that makes any sense.

ooh,hard scifi!if,you like hard scifi read ''Revelation Space'' by Alastair Reynolds.i like Asimov,athough i've read only a bit of Robots series and a bit Foundation series

In fact I have read Revelation Space. I was unimpressed. It wasn't bad, it just didn't stand out in my mind. Pretty run-of-the-mill sci-fi.

you mean like in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?

Look at me: brain the size of planet and they ask me to take you to the bridge. Call that job satisfaction? 'Cause I don't.

<snip>

Ok, you are not E. E. Cummings, and even if you were, he's a pretentious idiot. Capitalization is not for squares.

[/QUOTE]In fact I have read Revelation Space. I was unimpressed. It wasn't bad, it just didn't stand out in my mind. Pretty run-of-the-mill sci-fi.
[/QUOTE]

yeah,at least it didn't have FTL travel.

[/QUOTE]
Look at me: brain the size of planet and they ask me to take you to the bridge. Call that job satisfaction? 'Cause I don't.
[/QUOTE]
what was that insulter's name?

I think Rush expressed my thoughts on the subject in their classic song Xanadu:


A thousand years have come and gone
But time has passed me by
Stars stopped in the sky
Frozen in an everlasting view
Waiting for the world to end
Weary of the night
Praying for the light
Prison of the lost ---- Xanadu

Xanadu ---- Held within The Pleasure Dome
Decreed by Kubla Khan
To taste my bitter triumph
As a mad immortal man
Nevermore shall I return
Escape these caves of ice
For I have dined on honey dew
And drunk the milk of Paradise

what was that insulter's name?

Wowbagger.

Wowbagger.

yeah,that was it.Wowbagger.

yeah,at least it didn't have FTL travel.

FTL isn't cliche, depending on how you do it. Star Trek: "Erm...it works...and relativity is for squares."

Ender's Game: "We [heart] realistic physics!"

I reckon it'd suck after a while, what with all the people you know and love constantly dying. It'd mess with your head a hell of a lot. You'd probably end up valuing human life a lot less than mortal people, especially since you could see first hand all the mistakes people in general make throughout history.

Seeing both WWI and WWII, for example (especially the trenches of the former and concentration camps of the latter) would definately damage your view of humanity in general.

Once one becomes immortal, does one loose the essential idea of humanity?

But then I imagine a lot of authors have touched on this sort of thing before.

I hear ya. One would definitely become jaded.

It would suck having people constantly trying to decapitate me with a sword. :p

In the end, there can be only one.

It would suck having people constantly trying to decapitate me with a sword. :p

Better than trying to do it with a spoon!

Those poor Lowlanders...so cursed...

Funny that.

I'm not faulting him for it, per se. I just don't like his books. He's a scientist, not a writer. I don't blame him for writing like a scientist. Mostly I just blame him for writing when he is a scientist.

Either way. Not saying he's bad. Just not my type.

In the end, there can be only one.

Didn't anybody teach them to share when they were toddlers? :(

How can you be immortal, without ALSO having the power to stop the universe ending or entropy destroying all available energy? Otherwise personal immortality is worthless, as you won't have anywhere to exist! That's always spoiled any chance for it, IMHO.

(on the sci-fi tip, if anyone's read Stephen Baxter's 'Time' there's a dystopian version of just that future)

How can you be immortal, without ALSO having the power to stop the universe ending or entropy destroying all available energy? Otherwise personal immortality is worthless, as you won't have anywhere to exist! That's always spoiled any chance for it, IMHO.

(on the sci-fi tip, if anyone's read Stephen Baxter's 'Time' there's a dystopian version of just that future)

Ah, but what if one exists in a solipsistic universe? It would be harmony.

Immortality isn't appealing because we love life, it's appealing because we're terrified of death. What would anyone do with an eternity?
No, immportality is appealing because we don't want our procrastination to cost us anything.
Most of us already waste the 70-85 years we call a lifetime.
Exactly. So we want more. It makes perfect sense.

I would undoubtedly take immortality were it offered. The suggestion that life's evets are somehow sweeter because we only have a limited time to savour them is ridiculous.

yeah,that was it.Wowbagger.

Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged.

Immortality for me, please! And near-invincibility, too. To stop any Murphy's Law type crap, like getting killed in a car crash on the way back from the immortality lab...

Unless you got buried in concrete or lava or something...in which case being immortal might well be the worst kind of existence possible short of Hell itself.This is why the near-invincibility, instead of all the way. Even under those conditions, I'd want it to take longer than normal for death to occur (to give any would-be rescuers plenty of time!). Or better yet, I could enter some kind of unconscious dormant state until I was dug back up (or brought back to the surface by some natural event).

But, even without catastrophic events like that, I'd want some kind of "escape clause" so if I actually wanted to die, I could...but that would have to be something only I could initiate--I wouldn't want anyone showing up with some kind of Kryptonite, after all!

How can you be immortal, without ALSO having the power to stop the universe ending or entropy destroying all available energy? Otherwise personal immortality is worthless, as you won't have anywhere to exist! That's always spoiled any chance for it, IMHO.

I figure if you can live long enough for that to be a real issue, you'll probably be able to solve it. Not a bad deal, although I'd prefer to be able to end such an existence should the situation or my personal mental health require it. The last thing I need is to spend 100,000 years trapped in a volcano.

How can you be immortal, without ALSO having the power to stop the universe ending or entropy destroying all available energy? Otherwise personal immortality is worthless, as you won't have anywhere to exist! That's always spoiled any chance for it, IMHO.

(on the sci-fi tip, if anyone's read Stephen Baxter's 'Time' there's a dystopian version of just that future)

I would object to that statement, given that the length of the universe's existence can probably be measured in potentially trillions upon trillions of years.

And, if you've followed some of Stephen Baxter's OTHER works, you'd be familiar with the idea of creating new universes and then moving into those universes. Who says you have to try to survive entropy at all?

I'll pass, thank you.

Better a life of fleeting success than an eternity of procrastinating mediocrity and intellectual decadence. I think the following regarding immortality: The Morlocks are going eat you, thus you are just replacing the mechanism through which death happens.

I'll pass, thank you.

Better a life of fleeting success than an eternity of procrastinating mediocrity and intellectual decadence. I think the following regarding immortality: The Morlocks are going eat you, thus you are just replacing the mechanism through which death happens.
But it happens later.

You can still have fleeting success amidst your eternity of procrastination. And most of us don't do anything aside from procrastinate anyway.

I would object to that statement, given that the length of the universe's existence can probably be measured in potentially trillions upon trillions of years.

And, if you've followed some of Stephen Baxter's OTHER works, you'd be familiar with the idea of creating new universes and then moving into those universes. Who says you have to try to survive entropy at all?

I have read them all, so ner-ner! :p But I'm trying not too invoke toooooooo much extra sci-fi stuff as a deus ex machina for immortality.

Who cares if its a trillion trillion years, if you're immortal you will outlive it. If entropy is still behaving like it is now, you're going to have a hard time doing anything.

Ah, but what if one exists in a solipsistic universe? It would be harmony.

But a tad lonely!

I think immortality would be great, I would do anything for it. Think of all the things you want to do with your life, the places you want to see but may never get the chance. Without death you could really do anything you want for the first time in your life. Time no longer gets in your way of your goals. You could work your way into anything and do anything you want, or visit the places you want to go to. Money would not even be an issue in some way, since you have all the time in the world to get the amount you need to live your live the way you want.

i would chooese immoratality ...thoguh it might be sad and lonely ..there are so many things to see and do ..

and by living for a long time you have time to change your past mistakes ..you have the time to change thw world what with your immortal experience and wisdom ...

i think its a good idea ....

Immortality? No thanks.

after all, Immortality is not dying. not 'Not Aging'. can you imagine being so old that you cannot walk, can't control your bowl movements, striken with dementia, and being like that until the end of time?

after all, Immortality is not dying. not 'Not Aging'. can you imagine being so old that you cannot walk, can't control your bowl movements, striken with dementia, and being like that until the end of time?

I couldn't imagine spending eternity without firm control of my bowls. That stuff isn't cheap.

Immortality? No thanks.
after all, Immortality is not dying. not 'Not Aging'. can you imagine being so old that you cannot walk, can't control your bowl movements, striken with dementia, and being like that until the end of time?

Normally, by immortality people imply also lack of aging. Every single concept of immortal involved that, except for parodies.

Normally, by immortality people imply also lack of aging. Every single concept of immortal involved that, except for parodies.

actually it's reduced aging. else people born as immortals would still be infants. :tongue:

that or if a Djinn was involved. ;)

EDIT: actually, the definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/immortality) is only unending life. nothing about being ageless or timeless or even unaging.