Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TsoTsoni t1_j21gj0r wrote

Reply to comment by muaru1 in Can we limit uploading brain to computers for eternal life posts? by hootsmcboots

We are not talking about anti aging or nootropics, or telomeres... we're talking about immortality. That would be the literal end of humanity. Do you think this new gift, if achieved, would be equally shared among all people? Or just the influential or wealthy? We both know the answer because it's rhetorical question. Now those lives that are not eternal, based on our history, would end up serving to sustain those lucky few who will never know a natural death. Count me out.

1

muaru1 t1_j21gyhf wrote

It’s impossible to judge how it will be implemented just as it was impossible to judge for previous humans what the effects of the printing press, antibiotics, etc. would be going forward. Future society will operate by entirely different paradigms than what we are accustomed to now. It is highly possible that in a dwindlingly populated word with negative replacement rates that immortality is seen as the solution. In fact, based on trends, I would say this is a likely reality, given that it is possible to begin with.

1

TsoTsoni t1_j21p12z wrote

Ok well if it's a conversation about social justice and the future of equality and all the good things we can strive for, I'll bite and accept that it would be grand for all humans to live forever, zooming through the stars in benevolent brotherhood and sisterhood.
For now, humans continue to exploit their environment and each other for personal gain. Our history does not indicate a drastic shift in this trajectory any time soon. If we can actually learn to live in love, then maybe you're right. I am confident in my opinion that we're too immature, collectively, to even consider immortality as having a generally beneficial effect on our species.

1