← Back to context

Comment by nutjob2

12 hours ago

Most people want more life. For most people it's also the most terrifying part of "the natural human experience".

If you're happy to die, why be bothered by others' trying to live longer? You won't be around. And assuming people can finance it themselves, is it really a problem for society?

There are cultures where dying isn't feared like it is in Christian based societies. It's considered a natural progression and part of nature.

I'd also say people may want more life for themselves, but what does that mean at scale, forever?

I assume you mean that dying is the most terrifying pat of the natural human experience. Also, I'm not sure why you infer that me thinking death is a natural part of life, means that I'm happy or eager to die.

There are many reasons that people living forever would be a problem for society, the most obvious being an ever-increasing population.

Because living longer is a huge drain on resources that could be better spent on other things. End of life care is expensive and rarely results in a "good" life for the the life being extended.

  • The way we will actually all live substantially longer is by health extension, not by extending life while suffering from decrepitude.

  • So I think curing means basically opt in death or something like that. Right now extended life is bad because the person isn't in his prime but curing aging is basically gonna keep him in his prime. This might be what they meant.

Yes, I think it's a problem for society. Death in old age frees up social, economic, physical, and political resources for the next generation of the living. If the rich and powerful escape death, because after all they will the people with the resources to do so, society will lose the adaptability and natural change that comes from new generations taking the reins.