5 ms·

That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. If you're curious and have time, I'd suggest the

That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. If you're curious and have time, I'd suggest the following excellent exploration of the idea of extinguishing natural death by CGP Grey. He uses an interesting analogy to help challenge the ingrained belief that natural death is just https://youtu.be/cZYNADOHhVY?si=oCqVGD5RX9Q0Cnrk https://youtu.be/cZYNADOHhVY?si=oCqVGD5RX9Q0Cnrk

SoftTalker 3y ago
We only need to look at nature to see that everything dies. It is natural, and necessary. I am not in any way saying that people should be euthanized or disease not treated or that people not live out their natural lives. But artificial extension of life will only result in those who can afford it staying in power forever.
- tchaffee 3y ago
  We only need to look to nature to find the immortal jellyfish. Much of medical science is "artificial" extension of life. Natural would be you dying of Smallpox at a young age. Instead you've artificially extended your life with a vaccine. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii
- jdhendrickson 3y ago
  https://effectiviology.com/appeal-to-nature-fallacy/#:~:text=The%20appeal%20to%20nature%20is,because%20it's%20perceived%20as%20unnatural https://effectiviology.com/appeal-to-nature-fallacy/#:~:text....
  - dekhn 3y ago
    That's a logical fallacy. The argument you are responding to is not logical, but rhetorical (argument by analogy, based on the premise that analogous systems behave in similar ways). Logical fallacies don't apply to rhetorical arguments in a logical way. We can all do better than pedantically pointing out logical fallacies, as no argument outside of mathematics is completely logical.
- xereeto 3y ago
  To hell with nature! I have never understood this argument even a little bit.
chrisan 3y ago
> That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. There is a difference between living longer/forever and giving a child with terminal cancer a normal full life
- Teever 3y ago
  What is that difference?
  - lelandbatey 3y ago
    Living forever and living longer shouldn't be grouped together; living forever means unbounded existence and unbounded consumption over time. That's a fundamental paradigm shift for our entire system of being human. Saving extending the lives of more children is unfortunately, a statistics change for our current world. Unlimited life means all models of economics, morality generally, class, etc will be affected.
    - Teever 3y ago
      But no one is truely going to live forever. They'll die from disease or accident or murder. Everyone dies man.
    - mjan22640 3y ago
      Our cells live forever, despite the support "clumps" they create in the process eventually die off.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      > Unlimited life means all models of economics, morality generally, class, etc will be affected. That's also going to happen with automation — and I don't just mean AI, as it has been happening continuously since the power loom led to Karl Marx inventing Communism, or possibly even earlier with the social and technological changes of Adam Smith's era and the end of feudalism.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
ftxbro 3y ago
> That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. The idea isn't that poor people will get life extension, it's that families of billionaires will get it. And no it won't "trickle down" life expectancy is actually decreasing in USA despite tech gains. EDIT: downvote me if you want, you know it's true
- ajmurmann 3y ago
  Didn't most of the additional deaths come from COVID, drug overdoses and suicides? While those are terrible and need to be addressed, those don't seem to be related to availability of medical treatment.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Deaths of despair are linked to economic system configuration, pushed by the wealthy to remain static. Similar story with US healthcare. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/25/1164819944/live-free-and-die-the-sad-state-of-u-s-life-expectancy https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/25/1164819... https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/whats-behind-shocking-u-s-life-expectancy-decline-and-what-to-do-about-it/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/whats-beh...
    - ajmurmann 3y ago
      >Deaths of despair are linked to economic system configuration,[..] Sure there is a correlation between deaths of despair and poverty. However, the argument here was that healthcare advances won't tickle down with the evidence being declining life expectancy. That's a totally different claim. As of 2021 over 90% of Americans had health insurance coverage and AFAIK the vast majority of proven, legitimate treatments are available to those insured people. (sauce: https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-278.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-27...). >pushed by the wealthy to remain static What class war, conspiracy nonsense is this? Do you think "the rich" get together once a year, smoke cigars and discuss what policies to convince everyone of in order to keep the poors down because they are idiots who believe the world is a zero-sum-game?
rubinelli 3y ago
CGP Grey doesn't explore what happens after death is defeated. I can't imagine how it can lead to anything but a stagnated society, with prejudices and inequalities enshrined forever.
- seer 3y ago
  Wouldn’t it be the other way around? Now, since the effects of our prejudice, inequality etc, are usually borne way after we die, we don’t get to see the effects of our decisions. If we get to live a lot longer, we’ll be wiser in making better, more balanced decisions. As for stagnation, sure earth itself is quite overpopulated, but there is nothing technologically stopping humanity from colonizing the solar system. If humanity gets it shit together and becomes slightly more organized, those experiments in society will just happen in geographically different places. The “red mars, blue mars, green mars” trilogy explores this quite well, even if the science is a bit dated, the politics aspects of the books are quite interesting, tackling future colonization and longevity’s political pressures and opportunities.
  - rubinelli 3y ago
    That's a very rosy view of humans. The average person gets older, not wiser; they see the consequences of their actions and find someone else to blame. Real social and cultural change comes from new generations.

SoftTalker 3y ago

We only need to look at nature to see that everything dies. It is natural, and necessary. I am not in any way saying that people should be euthanized or disease not treated or that people not live out their natural lives. But artificial extension of life will only result in those who can afford it staying in power forever.

tchaffee 3y ago
We only need to look to nature to find the immortal jellyfish. Much of medical science is "artificial" extension of life. Natural would be you dying of Smallpox at a young age. Instead you've artificially extended your life with a vaccine. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii
jdhendrickson 3y ago
https://effectiviology.com/appeal-to-nature-fallacy/#:~:text=The%20appeal%20to%20nature%20is,because%20it's%20perceived%20as%20unnatural https://effectiviology.com/appeal-to-nature-fallacy/#:~:text....
- dekhn 3y ago
  That's a logical fallacy. The argument you are responding to is not logical, but rhetorical (argument by analogy, based on the premise that analogous systems behave in similar ways). Logical fallacies don't apply to rhetorical arguments in a logical way. We can all do better than pedantically pointing out logical fallacies, as no argument outside of mathematics is completely logical.
xereeto 3y ago
To hell with nature! I have never understood this argument even a little bit.

chrisan 3y ago

> That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. There is a difference between living longer/forever and giving a child with terminal cancer a normal full life

Teever 3y ago
What is that difference?
- lelandbatey 3y ago
  Living forever and living longer shouldn't be grouped together; living forever means unbounded existence and unbounded consumption over time. That's a fundamental paradigm shift for our entire system of being human. Saving extending the lives of more children is unfortunately, a statistics change for our current world. Unlimited life means all models of economics, morality generally, class, etc will be affected.
  - Teever 3y ago
    But no one is truely going to live forever. They'll die from disease or accident or murder. Everyone dies man.
  - mjan22640 3y ago
    Our cells live forever, despite the support "clumps" they create in the process eventually die off.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > Unlimited life means all models of economics, morality generally, class, etc will be affected. That's also going to happen with automation — and I don't just mean AI, as it has been happening continuously since the power loom led to Karl Marx inventing Communism, or possibly even earlier with the social and technological changes of Adam Smith's era and the end of feudalism.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

ftxbro 3y ago

> That's very easy to say until it's your partner, mother/father, or child on the other side of that assertion. The idea isn't that poor people will get life extension, it's that families of billionaires will get it. And no it won't "trickle down" life expectancy is actually decreasing in USA despite tech gains. EDIT: downvote me if you want, you know it's true

ajmurmann 3y ago
Didn't most of the additional deaths come from COVID, drug overdoses and suicides? While those are terrible and need to be addressed, those don't seem to be related to availability of medical treatment.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Deaths of despair are linked to economic system configuration, pushed by the wealthy to remain static. Similar story with US healthcare. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/25/1164819944/live-free-and-die-the-sad-state-of-u-s-life-expectancy https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/25/1164819... https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/whats-behind-shocking-u-s-life-expectancy-decline-and-what-to-do-about-it/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/whats-beh...
  - ajmurmann 3y ago
    >Deaths of despair are linked to economic system configuration,[..] Sure there is a correlation between deaths of despair and poverty. However, the argument here was that healthcare advances won't tickle down with the evidence being declining life expectancy. That's a totally different claim. As of 2021 over 90% of Americans had health insurance coverage and AFAIK the vast majority of proven, legitimate treatments are available to those insured people. (sauce: https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-278.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-27...). >pushed by the wealthy to remain static What class war, conspiracy nonsense is this? Do you think "the rich" get together once a year, smoke cigars and discuss what policies to convince everyone of in order to keep the poors down because they are idiots who believe the world is a zero-sum-game?

rubinelli 3y ago

CGP Grey doesn't explore what happens after death is defeated. I can't imagine how it can lead to anything but a stagnated society, with prejudices and inequalities enshrined forever.

seer 3y ago
Wouldn’t it be the other way around? Now, since the effects of our prejudice, inequality etc, are usually borne way after we die, we don’t get to see the effects of our decisions. If we get to live a lot longer, we’ll be wiser in making better, more balanced decisions. As for stagnation, sure earth itself is quite overpopulated, but there is nothing technologically stopping humanity from colonizing the solar system. If humanity gets it shit together and becomes slightly more organized, those experiments in society will just happen in geographically different places. The “red mars, blue mars, green mars” trilogy explores this quite well, even if the science is a bit dated, the politics aspects of the books are quite interesting, tackling future colonization and longevity’s political pressures and opportunities.
- rubinelli 3y ago
  That's a very rosy view of humans. The average person gets older, not wiser; they see the consequences of their actions and find someone else to blame. Real social and cultural change comes from new generations.