Actually sport it is a narrative

Main Menu


Started by Faradaympp, February 25, 2010, 12:24:26 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Quote from: "skevosmavros"Hi all - this is my first post here (came via Happy Atheist twitter).

I choose immortality.

It's an interesting question - to be or not to be.  I used to resist the idea of immortality both on the grounds that it seemed impossible to me (technically it still does, but I think we might one day achieve something so darn close to actual immortality that there is no practical difference), but also because, like others in this thread, I thought eternal life would make life meaningless, or at least a whole lot less special.  Without the prospect of death's sting, would we enjoy life?

I have shifted over the years however.  When discussing immortality, people (including me once) seem to be assuming that the process of becoming an immortal is irreversible and confers complete indestructibility.  That to be an immortal means to be condemned to eternal life, whether one still wants it or not.  Who says immortals cannot die if they choose to?  If the process of making me immortal can be reversed by me (and by me alone I guess, otherwise am I really immortal?), then becoming an immortal seems a zero-risk proposition to me -- in the unlikely event I become bored with life, I can always end it.

If, for the sake of argument, I assume that immortality is somehow irreversible and it makes me indestructible, does it also make me compelled to be conscious at all times?  If not, and if I become bored with life, I guess I could render myself completely unconscious - essentially ending my life for all intents and purposes, at least as far as I am concerned.  Perhaps I could set up a system that wakes me every few millennium or so, just to see if I've changed my mind, or if the universe has gotten more interesting while I was "away".

All this assumes immortality is even possible of course.  If the question is changed to "radically lengthened lifespans in the order of billions of years", then it becomes slightly more realistic, and doesn't change my answer.


Skevos Mavros

There is also the option of a super natural medium causing your immortality. Perhaps it will watch you suffer eternal boredom to satisfy it's own.
Quote from: "Ivan Tudor C McHock"If your faith in god is due to your need to explain the origin of the universe, and you do not apply this same logic to the origin of god, then you are an idiot.


Quote from: "Ellainix"There is also the option of a super natural medium causing your immortality. Perhaps it will watch you suffer eternal boredom to satisfy it's own.

I hope it eventually gets bored and puts us out of its misery.
Skevos Mavros


Given the choice between immortality and mortality, I would choose the latter.  I just do not think that the human psyche--even if perfect cognition were maintained--could enjoy an unlimited existence.  Humans seem driven by change, and I think that the change from "alive" to "dead" may be the most important of all.  I think that we really only enjoy things which necessarily end; it is the possibility of not having a thing that makes having the thing worthwhile at all.  This is why I find the concept of some eternal consciousness in the afterlife to be more frightening than any fiery pit of damnation.

I picture an immortal life like a massive ice cream sundae.  The first few bites are amazing, the next few are okay, but scraping up the dregs of hot fudge and melted ice cream from the bottom is really not that enjoyable.  By that point, it is actually more pleasant to not eat ice cream than it is to eat it.  In much the same manner, I think that no matter how enjoyable life may be, eventually not being alive will be more enjoyable than being alive.

But I would take the option to live an extremely long life, whether it be thousands, millions, or even billions of years.  Or if the immortality were conditional, as in suicide remained an option, then I would probably do it.  However, any sort of death seems contradictory to the concept of immortality.


I once wrote a story about an immortal being that found a way to kill himself and took it. Anyway, things have to die to make way for new things. Its coded in our DNA.

That is why I dislike the notion of Heaven, it would be boring to live forever, forever worshiping God. That would get old IMO. Even if in Heaven you could do whatever you wanted to, I'm sure after 100 Billion years you would just want it to end...

Here's an interesting question, if you could live forever, how old would you want to stay? Me? Probably about the age I am now, late 20's. Not a little child and not too old to have any major diseases. Speaking of that, wouldn't it be terrible if you lived forever with cancer... or burning in Hell??? I can't stand that either...

Yeah, I jump all over the place, lol.


I'll settle for a lifespan of 10 to 50,000 years, with an option to bail out earlier if I want to. Any way, I'd recommend anyone who wants to be immortal, invincible or invisible to read Fredric Brown's great short stories  "Great Lost Discoveries - I, II and III".
The universe never did make sense; I suspect it was built on government contract.
Robert A. Heinlein