(2)Immortality, a Philosophical Joust

We've opened a fresh 'Joust' topic, denoted by '(2)'... In respect to Joshua's wishes, it's only fair to have a joust between two people. If you'd still like to respond, please post your reply to the original topic here. Only Bruce & Joshua should reply to this thread. Thanks


Joshua Says:
Immortal? us?
I do not see it.

Rather, I see us as the creators of immortals. But upon which minds would we bestow such independance? You give mankind too much credit, methinks. We are greedy with power and egotistical with identity. We will, in our masterfull creations, create persian flaws. Also, with regard to being immortal - I think that is a waste of energy. Consider: What is more important? You or mankind?
Your works and knowledge or mankind's collective works and knowledge?

I think that immortality is a relegion of the self. To sustain ego binds us to a singular being whereas opening one's mind to embracing death with dignity hastens the process of being able to become shoulders that one might stand on in the future.

I welcome that opportunity for healthy debate on the matter. We have weakened our diversity enough with modern medicine. The mechanisms of life itself have been glued with our well-intentioned road paving - do you honestly think that mankind is MORE than life? Death is the very mechanism that life RELIES upon to affect adaption. No.

If anything will save mankind or bring upon us a new golden era, it will be a 99% decrease in population. Like so many starved dear.

joshua

Bruce says:
What if nothing exists after death?

Joshua Says:
What do you mean, "What if there is nothing after death?"

This statement is egocentric, you see: Even if you die, your work can be the shoulders that someone else stands on. Mankind will continue, dear Bruce. Personally, I have inclinations towards the judeo-christian mythos, but - I have my own reasons. Not so much Fear, per se. At any rate, if I grope around a bit I still find that I can find my atheistic humanist hat and *ahhhhh, yes* it still fits rather snugly.

You see, immortality is actually something quite dangerous for *any* life. The mechanisms of the universe need to be fluid. Consider our constitution, for example. If it were not written in such a fasion as to be mutable - then, my friend, future generations would not be able to adapt its content to suit their times. So as it is with life. If we end death, we also end the mechanisms that allow us to adapt into the unknown. We need genetic diversity to insure our survival. This means dying and fucking, I am afraid.

But, such is life. N'est pas?

Now - insofar as ego is concerned. . . I do admit a sadness at not being able to fit my mind around all that is - but dear Bruce, that is why we have language and division of labour. We are a macrocosm for life on a cellular level. Our society is an organism. It will endure your death just as your body will endure the death of millions of your columnar cells. Fear not - you can leave your mark.

Individuality is a spiritual construct. You are a man in a tribe. Your tribe is what matters - not you.
*shrug*

joshua

Should we then not give blue green algae credit for being our ancestors? They hobbled around with little ability to contemplate their life and future, yet they are our great great*^100000 grandfathers and grandmothers. We started from such humble beginnings and we're still quite humble. Thus should give us hope... we're moving in the right direction.

We shall continue to improve.. it's just happening a much faster rate now. Our instinct and will dictate innovation and complexity. The problem I see is that DNA and nature have us set to die.. not for a morally justifiable reason, but simply because we evolved in such a way that sex and death was the most successful at creating intelligence.

DNA's soul purpose as an immortal molecule, is to get rid of it's carrier when it's determined no longer useful to evolution. Should we be beholden to the programming of a tiny molecule? DNA has marked each of us to die in order to make way for the next generation. It doesn't have to be this way. Actually, it has not always been this way. For the majority of life, from 4.3 billion years ago to about .5 billion years ago, all life on earth was immortal - bacteria. Each organism, of course did not live forever, as the elements took their toll, but, the point is that we do have the potential for immortality.. immortality is not anti-nature. (please note the following example of bacteria alive after .25 billion year: Immortal Bacteria)



Remember the laws of physics? Energy is neither lost nor gained. Entropy will be a long term problem.. but this is another topic entirely.



Yes, one has to determine the importance of self and place life’s worth into hierarchy. I hold my life’s worth above country, company, and group. This is not being egotistical; it’s just my personal code. If I loose friends because of it, so be it. Maybe such "friends" do not have my best interest at heart. Obviously they do not care enough to respect my will to live.

I will not lay down my life, or put myself in the position of potential oblivion for some cause (unless the cause is physical immortality) I don’t consider myself a selfish person in sense, other than that I'm not willing to throw away my life for anyone else’s idea of freedom or chivalry. This doesn't mean I condemn the military or persons's wish to commit suicide. Everyone should have the right to make personal decisions about life and death. As I would not want others trying to stop me from living forever, I will not try and stop others from killing themselves.



Here again, I don’t see immortalists.... or better yet, I’ll speak for myself here; I don’t see myself as being egocentric other than for the fact that I will not lay down my life for any cause, no matter how noble.



You may wish to read the rebuttal’s to Leon Kass, Bush’s Bioethics advisor. Kass has expressed much similar ideas about immortality. He believes we should kill over in order to make way for the next generation. He says it’s our “duty” [Leon Kass Article].



My goodness, You must really want everyone to die? You and Kass should hook up.



For a clear explanation of this.. please read: Immortalist Philosophy

Please be patient while I give each of your points the attention that they diserve.

RE: New thread, good form.

joshua

Patients? [huh]

We're immortals... take your time.