Molly - very good - excellent point. I think it would be a quantum leap from frantically trying to do everything, achieve whatever, before we died to focusing instead on the here and now. The passage of time would loose much or all of its importance, I suspect. Thanks for pointing this out. Jim
On Aug 10, 8:41 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > A quantum leap into something better would in all probability take > place if we ourselves were extending our lives ad infinitum by a > change in viewpoint...a different perspective of time and space and > life in general. Not sure that would come with a forever young > pill... > > On Aug 8, 4:35 pm, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Good question, Jim. Endless life extension without aging? > > > Assume the issues of bad social effects and distributive justice > > raised in other responses were solved. Is endless continuation of life > > even then appealing? > > > What would be the purpose of, say, even 25% longer life? To know more > > great grandchildren? To climb another corporate ladder? Gain another > > PhD? > > > It seems to me whatever temporal good one seeks, all such goods are > > finite. Consequently, continuation of this life in a healthy 30- > > something body is more of the same, and would eventually become as > > boring as h-ll. Consider life beyond mere life extension: a quantum > > leap to something better! > > > On Aug 6, 1:01 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Many of the recent threads - evolution, non-medical healing, are we in > > > control, Feynman's mysteries, etc. - seem to dance around on the > > > wavecrest of scientific discoveries. It strikes me that, given the > > > major scientific advances in recent decades and the increasing speed > > > of scientific progress, in the foreseeable future - 100 years maybe - > > > humans may be able to elect to live without aging. We might well be > > > able to maintain our bodies at age 30 or 40 or whatever as long as we > > > like. In other words, we might be able to choose to live forever. > > > If we accept that as a possibility, I wonder what sort of > > > philosophical issues it raises. How might our view of life and death > > > be changed, if at all? How would our economies adapt? Would people > > > still marry for life? Would it change communities? Would our > > > objectives - happy life, great wealth, friendships, learning, travel > > > etc. - change, and if so how? And how would we settle such issues? > > > Anyone care to pursue this thread? Jim- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
