(May 1, 2015 at 6:13 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:(May 1, 2015 at 5:51 pm)AdamLOV Wrote: The fact that you want to see all that in no way implies that others would even want to see the fruition of those possibilities. Thermodynamics does not care about our hopes and desires. This may seem callous, but it is a fact of existence that negentropic living systems are born so as to die. The very callousness of evolution, the fact that it has resulted in unattainable desires, such as those listed by yourself (some, if not all of the utopian goals listed by yourself are unattainable, that much we can admit), would militate against prolonging negentropy. Life, put simply, does not deserve to be prolonged. Medical science has made great strides in eliminating physical pain, and even psychological suffering could one day be eliminated, but it is doubtful that suffering in general could ever be eliminated. Therefore life would, at best, become a condition filled with unbearable boredom. Furthermore, the New-And-Improved humanity's levels of tolerance in relation to suffering would be greatly diminished, and were technology to, horrible dictu, experience a regression, they would find many of the forms of suffering we have grown used to simply intolerable. Relegation of present forms of suffering could therefore have the side-effect of sentencing future generations to even more horrible levels of pain. Perhaps you do not really want to see what technolgical innovation may have in store. That said, suffering should definitely be combatted in any way possible, for example via encouragment of euthanesia for the terminally ill. But we should never forget that life itself is a terminal illness.
Wow, that was a whole lot of nothing.
Again, if you believe this, then you shouldn't partake in medical procedures (whether they're as simple as vaccinations or as involved as surgery) to prolong your life.
And I really don't care what others, outside of my loved ones, would like to see or not see. And even then, their desires can only influence mine up to a point.
Keep in mind, I never said I wanted to live forever. But, I find the 70-100 years (which is a much longer life span than humans had when living au naturel... I hope the irony isn't lost on you) to be far too short a span. Give me a few centuries. Maybe even 1000 years, and I'll be happy.
And, yes, I'm aware that my curiosity, were it fulfilled, may cause me to witness or directly experience negative results. I'm okay with that. I don't find the idea of living to be so utterly hopeless as you seem to.
You suggest that the goal of medical procedures would be to prolong life. I beg to differ. If one accepts, as neurology would attest to, that the nervous system usually becomes inoperative after clinical death (although out-of-body illusions have been experienced by some patients), then death cannot be painful. Rather, the imminence of death is what gives cause for apprehension, the suffering caused by terminal illness, and not the state of death itself. As Epicurus reminds us, dissolution is nothing to be feared. A sudden death, consequently, should not be feared, and indeed, cannot be directly averted by current medical procedures. Therefore, the goal of medicine would be to alleviate pain. I partake of medicine so as to avoid pain, for example the pain of falling gravely ill. A few more centuries of life and "you'll be happy?" I do not want to burst your bubble. I respect your optimism, especially considering the parlous state of the planet. In response, I would utilize a culinary analogy: if one pours too much salt in one's soup, the soup will not become less salty if one continues pouring salt into it.
