Is Life Extension Ethical?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ค. 2024
- As medical science improves and lifespans rise, we must consider not only if life extension is possible, but if it is ethical.
Watch my exclusive video Dark Stars At The Beginning Of Time: nebula.tv/videos/isaacarthur-...
Get Nebula using my link for 40% off an annual subscription: go.nebula.tv/isaacarthur
Learn more about Space Vision and SEDS: spacevision.seds.org
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @isaacarthursfia
Visit our Website: www.isaacarthur.net
Join Nebula: go.nebula.tv/isaacarthur
Support us on Patreon: / isaacarthur
Support us on Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/isaac-a...
Facebook Group: / 1583992725237264
Reddit: / isaacarthur
Twitter: / isaac_a_arthur on Twitter and RT our future content.
SFIA Discord Server: / discord
Credits: Is Life Extension Ethical?
Episode 417; October 19, 2023
Written, Produced & Narrated by:
Isaac Arthur
Editor:
David McFarlane
Graphics by:
Jeremy Jozwik
Music Courtesy of
Epidemic Sound epidemicsound.com/creator
Stellardrone, "Red Giant"
Chapters
00:00 Intro
02:32 Not Natural
12:18 Immortality Is Wrong
14:16 It Would Get Boring
15:57 Overpopulation
19:50 Unequal Access
23:52 Upward Mobility
27:58 Slows Technological Progress
29:59 Slows Cultural Change
31:22 Erodes Traditional Relationships
32:29 Ends Children
34:55 Makes You Inhuman
37:38 Gradual Life Extension
40:13 Summary
42:04 Dark Stars
43:33 SEDS
44:36 Schedule
46:00 Credits - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
HR: "I'm sorry, but we're only looking to hire somebody with at least 5,000 years of experience."
All that work for a measly 11.25 an hour...
Alternatively, by 200+ years you should theoretically be rich, or have invested in something that will bring money back so you don't have to work anymore.
Then you get to be a boomer that scoffs at them hundred years old youngins who are still struggling with their life choices.
The happiest time of my life was working at convenient store with 6 other guys. We worked different shifts, had each others backs, hanged out together after work. I would love to go back to those days. We are still in touch today and we helped each other get different jobs over the years. We don’t hang out like we used to. May go a couple years without seeing each other. That was in the 90s. I made little but it was the happiest time of my life.
Seriously, if your still poor after 200 years then you were the problem, not everyone else. @@nitthecroller
@@GiRR007 Why 200? Why not 20 or 50 years? You are looking at it from the current perspective. Your conclusion is of course a possibility but it is also a possibility that we will grow to fit our new parameters. The idea of needing decades or centuries to get good pay and benefits is not as laughable as it sounds if your expectancy is more than a few centuries.
@@rorymcgregor625 It's about not not being able to become someone who has enough social worth after 200 years. Not just adapting to society. Not to mention how much easier it would be 200 years from now to make money as new types of jobs we dony have today will exist, also the price of goods coming down a lot because of automation.
Allowing any group or organization to decide the “ethics” of life extension is frightful dangerous. It gives whatever group makes that decision the chance to use “ethics” as a means of gaining the literal power of life and death over every human being.
vis those controlling who gets health care or not in the USA.
@thekaxmax you can get great Healthcare in the US, you just gotta pay up. Same would go for Life extension. Who decides the price? who gets it and how much? can you as an individual decide not to partake? These are Qs that will hopfully be asked. Because the technology is coming whether we like it or not.
Better than allowing money to be the deciding factor. Billionaires not getting to live forever is worth me not doing the same as well.
@@1873Winchesterimagine your least favorite country or corporation presently on earth is the sole distributor of life extension technology. they're providing it to anyone on earth who applies, as long as they sincerely agree to live the remainder of their extended lives according to corporate TOS or that country's laws. is that preferable to only the ultra rich having access?
please don't take this as a defense of wealthy elites, I just mean it as a fun hypothetical
I'd say that if life extension/biological immortality becomes a thing, it should ideally be available to all, and the choice to have life extension should be up to the individual, who should be able to also stop it at any time
On occasions like this, I often point out;
'The entire practice of medicine has *always* been about increasing human life and health.
Always.
So then, where did you *think* it would stop?
Where do you *want* it to stop...?'
Nowhere.
I plan to live forever. Or at least until I die from being killed, which is bound to happen eventually.
Not the entire. Some of it has been malpractice, and frankly scammy, if you ask me. Abortive at its worst
This misses the point that if you live a much longer lifespan you will procrastinate forever.
Why should you do things in this century and not in the next?
Without death as a constant reminder of our mortality, we will slowly rather than later enter a perpetual state of procrastination.
@@RealCodreX You're generalising the entire population of everyone ever
The “boredom” argument always makes me deeply sad for the person who said it. If they actually think about it and are still totally sincere, it makes me want to cry for them. Anti-depressants, better friends, and a bit of curiosity are what I would recommend, regardless of any other factors. Longer life means more opportunities to try new things, broaden one’s abilities, make more friends who also live longer, and get good enough at things to enjoy them.
And as you so wisely said: someone else’s boredom should not force me to die sooner
As a thought experiment the implications of immortality has been covered to death, I can't recall any times where it has had good connotations.
Life extension to 2/300 years I could see, biological immortality I don't see working.
How many people in our current world sit in a rut and don't try new things as is. They finish work, go to the same bars, drink the same drinks, watch the same shows etc.
Even people who like trying new novel things tend not to give their dislikes and prejudices a second chance. When you are 1000 years old and have every single toy and instrument ever dreamt of bought, played with and discarded what kind of debauchery will you descend to for novel experiences.
@@eoinkenny3188You are just assuming the worst without knowing what biological immortality would even look like from a neurological perspective. Of course everyone *has* to seek out increasingly depraved acts to keep themselves feeling alive, it can’t be just you!
@@odinson4184 I'm glad we agree!
@@eoinkenny3188 i think it was sarcasm
@@eoinkenny3188 to me boredom argument is ridiculous too. One of, if not the main reason id want longer life for myself(much, much longer) is having more time to learn and explore. The world we live in is so infinitely complex and fascinating, typical human lifespan is way to short to even begin making use of all its wonders. 1000 years wouldnt be enough. I cannot even comprehend how could someone be bored with all the beauty and complexity of our universe, mere thought seems naive and ignorant to me.
Life extension is a gradual process. We've already drastically increased especially the average life span, but also maximum life span. Doing things that extend your life, like getting cancer treatment, taking statins against cardio vascular disease, doing regular workout etc, etc, are never considered unethical. I have a very hard time accepting that any such action is unethical. I just don't think it will be a thing ever.
I agree, I also see discussion as a bit irrelevant, outlawing it will probably work much worse than outlawing drugs.
Well this is an drug most want.
Now I can see taxing it as relevant, but now poor people can not get it unless from criminals who in best case steal it for sale.
More relevant retirement age will go up and for obvious reasons go away if you lived forever.
Trillions of people will migrate every standard year.
Where have we drastically increased maximum lifespan? Like mentioned in the video, there has been only one documented person to live past 120 and she died in 1997. In spite of the medical advances in the last 25 years since her death, no one else on the planet had made it to 120. I was reading about the last veteran of the Revolutionary War named Daniel Bakeman. He died in 1869 at age 109 in spite of living in an era of no modern medicine. He wasn't even the oldest living person of his era which shows, so far at least, there hasn't been any real advancement in maximum human life span. Average lifespan, yes, but not maximum. That is the major barrier science still has to overcome.
@@FlintIronstag23Totally agree with you, and very nice point about the Revolutionary War vet.
@@FlintIronstag23 where have we drastically increased lifespan? Get your countries epidemiological data.
People are dying older. More people are surviving with more comorbidities that used to kill them earlier.
We don’t have 120 years common, but even more surviving to late 70’s -80’s and 90’s is and will continue to put more strain on health care.
In a technologically competent Future World, where it is both feasible and socially accepted to live indefinitely in good physical and cognitive shape, people in that society are going to call this technology by some ordinary term like "health care."
Scary thing is you have a point. Especially considering the large amount of unnatural things people make and use on a regular basis. Including the entire field of Medicine.
@@TrinityCore60Unnatural? People are “naturally” born with life threatening congenital diseases and disabilities. People are “naturally” born with poorly designed feet that are energy inefficient. People are “naturally” born unable to digest nutrient rich lactose. Natural being the standard for a healthy human is an absurd notion, it’s more frightening that people still believe it.
Basically, view aging as a disease and that's exactly what it is, just treating a chronic condition that everyone has.
@@TrinityCore60we are part of nature, everything we do is natural as is part of our species behavioral survival strategies to modify our surroundings to our advantage, and that's exactly the same for any other species capable of modifying the environment
Dunno how feasible indefinitely is lol. But another century or 2 sure.
Literal Immortality could become a curse. I don't think any amount of medical advances can stop our minds from losing it by living several thousand years. I could go for another 300 or so years though!
‘Live for ever or die trying’ best quote
Personally, I really look forward to life extension technology and gaining an indefinite lifespan in my own lifetime, and I think that it should be to anybody who wants it, especially our family members and pets
"The true inevitability is not death, but that life always wins" Now that's my motto
I rather die.
100 percent agree with you and would definitely look forward to it. I mean I'm in my early 50s and I know the clock is ticking, and yet there's more things that I still want to do then I could ever do in one or even two or three lifetimes. Not only that but I kind of want to see what happens you know, do we conquer space travel things like that
@@bastiaan7777777 Then go ahead, nobody is stopping you, just don't force other people to make the same choice.
@@bastiaan7777777how bout tomorrow? People say they wanna die but never wanna die tomorrow but unless something changes there's always gonna be a day where you die the next.
Nice. I love the longer episodes. Thank you Arthur. You don't know it, but you have been with me through the worst times of my life, having someone approach the future with an optimistic eye has been very helpful.
Thanks for sharing that
i can second, the longer episodes are the best!
Same here
I second this
The term "poor mortals" gains new meaning.
Maybe but think that argument is not that realistic.
@logex621 yeah, it will eventually get that cheap that everyone will have access to it.
Its unfortunate that there are still people today that wont see the end of death. Like think about it, imagine in the future where no one dies. How much worse does that make literally every death that came before that point...@@goratron1
Choosing to hold back technologies that could have saved people from the pains and ailments of aging makes you responsible for that suffering when it happens. That's the simple utilitarian ethics of the situation.
I have the technology to save a lot of people from suffering: Just stop praying. Praying does nothing: seek help.
It’s not so simple. Unless the process also allows for making humans significantly more open minded (which is its own can of worms), societal progress would stagnate as the older generations stayed alive forever and attempted to keep society the way it was when they were young. Can you imagine if the people that fought for the Confederacy never died off?
@@saucevc8353 "Can you imagine if the people that fought for the Confederacy never died off?|
What? No, I am no yankee.
@@saucevc8353 How awful. We'd never even be able to install a Federal Reserve bank!
@@bastiaan7777777 Unless you support slavery, you probably wouldn’t be too happy living in a world where a significant portion of the population are former slave owners, even if you hate the North too. And keep in mind they would still be alive as well.
On a Tolkien board I couldn't help but think that with Elves being immortal Elven royal families would logically see either lots of palace intrigue, as dad won't die off naturally for the son to succeed him, or the son would set off and start a kingdom of his own. Which I think was what happened a lot in the 1st Age. The sons of Feanor at least all had their own kingdom and basically every Noldor noble house did so too.
The merger of immortality and nobility is a terrifying concept in general.
Less than having to suffer from ilnesssess of old age. They are disgusting.
Immortality brings its own challenged but people who are truly strong will at least try to adapt and that is more than most people will ever do
Fantasy martial arts stories with cultivation where people can live for thousands of years get around that issue in a variety of ways. However my favorite way is by making immortals super eccentric. The immortal finds something they love doing and could do for entire life so they practically abandon everything to focus on that single thing. You can have the immortal king abdicate throne because they love brewing alcohol so go live as a hermit making moonshine, they just make entire life revolve around doing what they actually enjoy. If you live long enough you either go full eccentric hermit focusing on what you love or get killed because you refuse to abdicate power.
Where is your pfp from?@@domehammer
The issue is applying the viewpoints of mortal people to immortal people. We can't just assume that. Life extension would absolutely precipitate cultural and sociological reevaluation. Our ideas of what is and isn't important WOULD change.
No one would need to chase power, because the clock wouldn't be chasing them. We could replace ambition with inspiration.
I can't wait to see what you're posting in 1000 years! :)
"should have nuked em while we had the option....?
Life extension is not just ethical, it is arguably a good that we've been pursuing for the entirety of the existence of our species. Granted, so far we've just managed to improve the likelihood of living a longer life rather than a true life extension, but as someone who had chemotherapy to cure cancer when I was in my 30s, my life has already been extended by 14 years beyond the "natural" termination of my life.
Obviously, that doesn't mean that a cure for senescence wouldn't have its own, serious consequences; if we were truly to find our lives extended by a factor of two or three, it would need to come with additional responsibilities and expectations. But denying life extension is not a viable answer; we might solve problems killing anyone over 65 with a serious illness, but few people would view that as anything but monstrous.
Hell you could more easily argue that NOT allow life extension is UNethical.
It should be the mission of all humanity to pursue the elimination of aging and death. It seems built into us. What pains the heart worse than grief and loss?
On another tack entirely, imagine the shift a 300 year lifespan (as an example) would make to our thinking about the scale of projects we'd be more likely to commit to undertaking. One of the biggest issues with a shorter lifespan (or any limited lifespan, really, whatever the length), is that we tend to only dedicate ourselves to projects we expect to be able to see through in the time we believe we have. What far greater stars would individuals reach for were they only to know they had the time alive to actually achieve them?
This is a big one for me. A 300 year lifespan would radically affect how I approach my activities in this life. So many subjects/skills I want but won't have time to master because of my biology... So many projects I'd like to undertake...
Denying someone life extension when it is possible simply amounts to age discrimination, denying medical care, and criminal negligence, all of which are deeply unethical.
Yeah, insurance companies
I've been watching SFIA for several years now. This is my favorite episode. I'm a cryonicist and life extension advocate, and have sat on panels on the topic with people you've likely heard of, and this is the most thorough and even handed treatment of the topic I've ever seen in a video format. Well done!
I deeply respect your ability to look at both sides of so many issues, feel so fair and objective, and yet never feel like an uncaring robot. Logical analysis does not have to undermine someone’s feelings and humanity, and you’re a great example
I appreciate the comments about post scarcity when it comes to this subject. If we truly achieve post scarcity and solve inequality for the most part, I feel that a good chunk of people would be just fine living longer and effectively being retired. Folks will find things to do if they're bored, even if that means becoming the best gardener in town, or perhaps the best player in their VR MMO of choice. Limited part time work might become the norm for many, if we learn to spread the work around and automate the rest. And that's before you think about all the folks who might look for opportunities off-world.
Inequality will always exist, and should exist. What's with desiring to see humanity in a perfect state of entropy?
@@Valchrist1313 I did say "for the most part", didn't I?
I really hope we could achieve such a future. I dread what the richest 1% might come up with though
Presumably this VR MMO would have no economy, and the best player would have nothing to do with owning superior gear.
All the players would be equally equipped.
I feel like maybe people would repeatedly disassociate from older memories and produce a new sense of self after long periods of time. Then they could access their old memories (computer stored or otherwise) as past lives.
Maybe they could even sub in an older, more suited self in instance of a sudden emergency and come back out when the danger has passed
If life extension is possible people will come to the conclusion that overthrowing any organization that would stop it's use would the best chance for your personal survival regardless of the odds against you.
One thing that jumps to mind right away, if we had more time on earth, then we might avoid the great turning cycle, just because we have longer memory for bad times, and bad ideas.
My girlfriend and I would definitely slow down on forming a family if we didn't have the deadline, because we both want to study a LOT, and achieve many things in our professional fields (her, physics and biology, me, physics and computer science)
“Grab a drink and a snack, sit back, and give those like and subscribe buttons a smack” 😂 I love it
Forced life extension is immoral because some people might believe death is the natural outcome from life or might want to for religious reasons, but leaving the option of life extension open for willing participants seems completely ethical to me, it might even speed up the progress of society not constantly losing important memories anymore.
Well, consider that for a moment; if old people who think slavery or repressing queer people are now gonna live forever, how good is that? Or flat earthers? Want them to live forever? People dying is kinda how progress works
@@rexmundi2986 Your comment makes me sick, I mean this literally, it makes me feel sick. You must believe one or more of these things to say what you just said; 1. "Bad" people outnumber the good. 2. People are incapable of change even over long periods of time. 3. If you believe in something incorrect, you are not deserving of life just for that belief. 4. Long life should only be given to people who fit what you deem as "good" and no one else.
1. I disagree. Society would not exist if this were true.
2. I disagree. People show the ability to change their ways constantly in their lives.
3. I disagree. If we adopted this practice society would not be able to develop, who decides what is "right think" vs "wrong"?
4. I disagree. This is eerily similar to what eugenicists think.
Naive
@@invaliduser6431 As expected, a completely logical rebuttal.
@@daisy9181 It's not optimism, it's logic. Please read my reply to rexmundi2986 because it applies to you as well.
the main and only real issue I see occurring with greatly extended life is Rich vs Poor division. The Rich will have it and get very much richer and the rest will just die 'young' being unable to afford it.
all the other reasons are silly, vain, limited thinking flawed ethics
Yes, it is. Anything that prevents you from dying is life extension. It's common practice already and the only barriers to immortality are philosophical.
About a century and a half ago, american declaration of independence has stated life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as alienable rights, and thus, albeit unintentionally, stated that if possible, the length of life should be the person's to decide
*unalienable
Happy Arthursday , fellow Arthurians we need to like , commet and share these videos more , Isaac Arthur deserves more recognition 🙏🏻
I used to want to live forever; to travel the galaxy and see untold wonders, and never shut up about it.
Now I'd only want to do it if i could edit my memory. My past trauma is too great and haunts me every minute of every day. My literal starry-eyed innocence no longer exists. There must be many others in my position. Waiting for the end.
I'm guessing memory editing will be a thing though...
I would imagine memory editing will be a thing, yes
maybe just encrypt the memory at some point so you can lock it away and every other millenium check it out see if you can deal with it then. Good luck anyways hope you live long and prosper.
I think what is being overlooked is that we are looking at this with our shorter lifespan paradigm. A longer lived person wouldn't necessarily look at longer wait times as longer. It is just our current wait times are stretched. I see the extended lifespan as open for new opportunities as technologies advance. The older of us would have the opportunity to make changes/educate ourselves to make a place for ourselves to utilize and advance our quality of life with them. As far as ethical, I believe it to be very ethical. Lifespan has been increasing for millenia. Quality of life, medicine, and technology have allowed us to live longer lives.
Quite frankly, for all the reasons listed before in previous videos I don't see all the disdain or objections against life extension as being all that valid.
I for one, would love to live longer.
Another fantastic episode, Isaac.
Thanks!
I think the first few thousand years would be a blast, I could easily see it wearing thin after a few million years, and I doubt anyone has the mental resilience to handle a few billion years of life's emotional drop kicks.
@muninrob Still hell of a lot more time compared to 80 years. And as Isaac said, if you are feeling bored you can take on increasingly risky thrilling things to alleviate that.
@@cannonfodder4376 I think it would be more accumulated sorrows than boredom, but would love to have that first few thousand years to become an omniglot. (stand on the shoulders of ALL the giants, not just the ones in one or two fields)
@@muninrobthe solution for bad memories is to not get extensible memory storage. Forgetting is a superpower.
What's the difference between life extension and treating someone for a disease or other health issue, thus...extending their life?
You have to wonder when people will warm up to the idea. It’s just another one of topics that too many people have knee jerk responses for without really thinking about it. It will change society in many significant ways, but I don’t think we’ve even scratched the surface of the myriad differences a society with radical life extension will have.
They will (partially) warm up to the idea when it becomes realistic. As is usual with fundamental medical advancements.
As a software engineer, 100 years to learn your craft seems good. You'd still be able to improve even after 100 years, especially because every year a new, better thing gets invented so your prior skills get obsolete and you'd need to learn again.
I've just started this as a hobby. I despise two handed typing. Is there a keyboard for one handed typing?
@@deker0954 you have three options.
Try a one handed keypad.
They aren't shaped like a keyboard, or mouse, or anything like that. For instance there's the Azeron Cyborg. It's a mouse, but each finger has up to six keys next to it, and there are also key combinations and such, which let you press around 120 different keys, + mouse and clicks with only one hand.
You could also just buy a tiny keyboard, like the ones used for tablets, if you're having trouble with budget, but these could be more of a hindrance than a helpful tool because of the tiny keys and pressing multiple of them accidentally.
Or, if you want to maximize your productivity, you could try to learn how to type on the keyboard with both hands while not looking at the keyboard. I can even type without looking at the screen and while speaking with people. It's an incredibly helpful skill because it works on almost any computer you run into.
I guess since you wanna do this as a hobbie this third option isn't the best for you, but it's still there.
Although in my opinion having one free arm not doing anything isn't great, what would you be doing with the other hand?
I've heard of 'chord/chorded keyboards' that encode each symbol not with a single button, but with a combination of buttons, with those one hand could easily type enough characters for the English language comfortably. I think court stenographers might use something like that, but I haven't heard of them being popular for common personal computer usage, you may need to custom-make one in addition to learning to type that way. @@deker0954
To rephrase it: Is it ethical to save billions of lives from death and decay each generation?
Is it ethical if you support me in ending mine?
Yeap, great question.
I think we should be thinking about what it means to “be ethical” and realise that people actually have different ideas about what that might be.
It is not a simple question, like what is the speed of light in a vacuum to x number of places. Which while difficult, a ballpark figure can get you reasonable practical results.
Not so these questions of should, ought, must etc...
No, it's not. Life will get worse for younger generations. Imagine being 30 and scrounging for meaningful work when your competition has hundreds of years of experience.
Life extension is bad. Lives should be short and fruitful. Death gives life meaning.
Birth rates would have to come down , other wise global populations would sky rocket. And We can’t support the numbers of people on the planet now
@@CharliMorganMusic Death doesn't give life meaning. That saying is pure cope.
Look at young children: blissfully unaware that they will die one day, and very much happy to play and explore.
Not aging is not the same as immortality. I have heard actuary say that if aging didn't happen the average life span would be about 700 years. Eventually everyone would get killed in an accident.
It is not the same, but it is a first step to such an endeavor. True immortality depends on whether the following three are possible
a) A constant longevity escape velocity- aging is not the only risk of death, so if you could perpetually be decreasing the risk, it would never reach the limit of 100 %.
b) (Technological) resurrection
c) Splitting, copying, doubling, etc consciousness
One thing in fantasy martial arts story with extremely long lived humans I like is how families are done. You'll have the founder of a family that is a 1,000 years however he won't really see several generations down the line as family. Like kids, grandkids, great grandkids, great great grandkids matter but after that point the founder doesn't really see them as family anymore. They share his blood but are so far removed from him that they might as well not be family. The founder along with surviving children are like pillars of stability, the foundation of rest of family that you rarely ever see. The founding ancestor stays in seclusion only caring if something happens to council of elders that are people the ancestor can see as family. The death of the founding ancestor or elders can be devastating to a family that might number in hundreds or thousands. The death of founding ancestor can mean destruction and scattering of the entire family. Other groups want the wealth that the family previously controlled and was protected by the founder.
Which I can see translate into a sci-fi setting really well. You get the founder being a hard working colonist that bought land and built up a empires worth of wealth over a 1,000+ years that lets family live as elites in arcology that world became. They actually own plots of land not just buildings on that land. They are the uber elites above the normal elites that own buildings on the arcology while everyone else rents. Which the founder rarely is ever seen in public, best you'll see is the founders children or elders of the family. Which if the founder dies then can have other groups see weakness and pounce on chance to get more wealth. Sure is a government but the real power on the arcology are the families of the original colonists. If a family falls could be a actual war between PMC's to take land by force and exterminate the fallen founders family. Is no other way to gain more power.
maybe I know of that trope could happen but it properly won't be typical for everyone.
Personally, I find the idea that life extension is somehow immoral to be extremely disturbing. I pretty much wasted the first half of my twenties being lazy and complacent, now I want to have the ability to buy those years back, and I refuse to allow anyone to tell me it's wrong to try.
There is nothing wrong with complacency on its own. The concept of being satisfied with your existence and not constantly seeking more and partaking in rampant consumerism is not a bad thing. Don't fall for the that trap.
Yeah. Imagine being a boomer and realizing you wasted 60+ years...
ive been on youtube for like 16 years and have over 450 subscriptions but your channel is the only one that actually makes me dream isaac. definitely my favorite channel by far.
After thinking about this for a bit, I think it is always ethical to extend life. Societal structures and attitudes will adapt.
I remember reading "The Last Question" by Asimov. In the story, one of the characters mentions that humanity has achieved immortality, but that is unsavory and has created many problems. He wasn't willing to give it up though because at over two centuries he he felt he hadn't lived long enough. The universe ended up being overcrowded. Great story.
CONDOMS
The universe became overcrowded?
@@mikerodgers7620 Yes. It is all about entropy and supporting a humanity that is a glut in the universe. It was written in the 50's so take it with a grain of salt, but it is really good. It was a short story. You can google it and read it.
On the plus side, it did end up resolving itself in the end.
@@mikerodgers7620basically entropy was leading to eventually there was less and less energy on a grand timescale thus all existence had to end
Not only are videos like these fascinating, they work as an excellent reference for my sci fi musings.
Thanks, Isaac
Isaac, you shows are amazing, Theater Quality even IMAX, I absolutely LOVE Them !
Issac wants to be healthy in the year 2100 making 4D videos about what the future of 2200 might look like. I hope to still be subscribed and bragging I knew him way back when.😅
One can always dream i quess. 😅
It's a path we've pursued since the dawn of time, and been quite successful with so far. Am I glad most people don't die by their 30's from easily preventable causes like tooth decay and the resultant gum disease anymore? Yes, yes I am.
As someone who, today (on the day this came out), attended a funeral for a relative of the friend of the family. Long chain I know, but seeing the family and friends of the deceased is something I was never really used to.
I was never a fan of death. The most I ever came to terms with it would have been months ago mostly. And afterwards I, while not rejecting acceptance of death, became less accepting of it for myself as I used to be. I relate to Isaac's shared sentiment with senescence researchers with the fact that I can't see it being worse than the alternative. I'd like to stick around for longer than most-all have... out of curiosity, to help people and whatever else needs it, and other reasons...
The amount anxiety that would be alleviated if life weren't so fickle at times... so fleeting...
It is man's oldest wish to be immortal. Pretending otherwise will not do any good. Comforting as it may be to say so, it tends to be very hypocritical, and only helps in the short term. We now know there are no gods jealously forbidding us life as Gilgamesh thought, it's not nature knowing better for our mental stability, it's not some cosmic providence, there is no karma to punish us for "hubris" (how nihilism can easily be served if it's shown as a mystic thing), it's fine to say that one enjoys life if they're not suffering. We are not nature's servants, we're equal and rightful co-creators. So we move to other ways to fulfill our ancient dreams, as we are now finding theological promises to be more unsatisfactory, on average/statistically. God is dead, long live God!
@@lilemont9302 Lol, I read the last bit as "live long Gods!" by accident, but I like it. Like, we are the gods. In a way, we are. We create all the time, many of us dream of creating worlds while those who can, work with others to do it. You're right, god is dead, we are and have always been the gods, we just need to embrace how awesome abilities as humans and keep moving forward.
Very well handled, Isaac. Bravo.
At first (childhood) i used to look at life extension or immortality as a selfish wish ,
But when i realize FTL travel is impossible and galaxies are millions and billions of lightyears away, i look immortality as the only solution
There is nothing wrong with being selfish. Don't believe propaganda where being selfless is only acceptable way to live. It's alright to pursue ones desires.
@@verti3213 i used to look it in this way (still do),
Because of immortality, old uninnovative people who dislike change or progress will remain on top , ruling over young innovative ones.
A stagnant society,
Its just now other factors are needed to be considered
@@eee9034 Selfishness is not inherently bad, it depends on what selfish acts you commit because of it
@@eee9034 ahh I thought you were jugdemental about immortality by denouncing it as mere selfishness. But yeah you are right possibility of stagnation. It's still better than mortality though. I view old age as utterly disgusting thing we just cannot do anything about
@@eee9034 not really, people will always find a way to move forwards, especially in a time where exploring and colonizing space becomes a thing. Plenty of space out there to form your own colony and many many competitors.
Also, the fear of losing their life to an 'accident' due to their tyranny would spook them away from stopping change that moves humanity forwards (unlike modern culture wars that are just destroying us and the ones who claim to be for moving forwards are just tyrants)
One of the things I always here when talking about infinite, or very long lives is "But what if dying is something that you want to do?" I will say that I do not contemplate this myself but: If you have lived for say even one thousand years, you feel you are ready to continue onward, you can, maybe that becomes a sort of ritual. But either way I believe if there is an option to die, that life extension is ethical.
Issac, yet another great episode of SFIA! Agreed, the thought of boredom with life has never entered my mind. Also, it seems to be in our nature... for the most part... to value, attempt to preserve, and prolong human life. Therefore, natural to extend life. The ethical implications of life extension are fascinating.
It seems like you've taken your audience's feedback into account, and are respectful of our own respective positions. Really appreciate your detail and candor.
On the subject of boredom, I've had conversations with people who believe in eternal after life,and almost invariably they just imagine having kids and living a quiet life with pets and family... Forever.
Always makes me think how much people underestimate what eternity means. Not to say that we would have to get bored, but considering crazy goals and activities is not a bad idea. What's a few thousands years of travel time when you have millions of years ahead.
To expand on that, hobbies are what keeps us entertained, and looking at random stuff and picking up an interest in it, then seeing the advancements makes us excited.
If anything I wonder about sports, how would they change if people got to live healthier and way longer. Would we see our favorite stars become better and better rather than retiring after 10 to 20 years? How would that change the sport?
On the defense of those who would look for a quieter life, I completely get them. I spent 8 months on the countryside caring for my mom on her final stretch and I gotta say I really miss doing all the housework and tending to her small veggie garden. It's become a dream of mine to just save enough to get a nice house in the countryside and work remote and/or freelance while I try to stabilize and make sure I can do chill stuff like growing my own food and just enjoying the quiet and slow paced life that comes along with it.
@@rRekko I understand the appeal of a quiet life but that's thinking with our own point of view of 80 years of life expectancy. Do you see yourself live through that for 200 years? Calm and quiet and just only that? A thousand years? Ten thousands? Longer? I respect that some people want that but I can't help but feel they under estimate how long it will be.
Eternity is scary long and when you're tired of it you have just gotten started.
@@daisy9181 oh yes, watch a fictional comedy show about a possible future as imagined back in the 90s? 00s? Completely legit. Sorry but don't just put words in my mouth, I never said moneyball everything, you can't say this is endgame when you don't know the implications of space travel and colonization.
The people who have stuff and can make it easier for themselves to have stuff, will always have more stuff. So what's the solution? Regulations. What if regulations don't reach every colony? Just move to another colony, or be a tyrant and expect the inevitable, a tyrant's death.
@@wylhias yeah, who knows how long a quiet life will last and when you'll get bored of it. What I'm saying is I can see the appeal of quietness, but with a longer lifespan you also can't say how it would affect how we see life. Maybe we learn to have more patience and don't need to change constantly to "avoid getting bored". The biggest problem we have right now is there is so much to do and so little time we feel we need to change stuff to avoid routine so we end up having shorter attention span and we end up wanting to change constantly because we get bored because we are used to change or else we feel we're stagnated and we need something new to feel like we're doing something good.
I play 1 terraria game to completion about every 3 months, I never get tired of it. I've had the same job for 12 years now, there have been ups and downs yet I don't need to change it.
That's just my two cents, everyone is different. There's people who've Speedrun a single game for 10 years, while there are people like one of my friends who doesn't finish a single game or show because his attention span is too short and goes back to jumping from older games to new games every few days and never commits to finishing a single one.
I feel the opposite way around, where if I had more time I'd like to live a more quiet life, and my mortality is what pushes me to try more experiences before I inevitably find out about the afterlife firsthand.
I desperately want this kinda of anti aging or eternal youth type technology to arise into a broadly useable state in my life time. The universe as so much to do and see and experience that even bound to earth it would take untold life times to consume it.
I also understand people’s desire not to continue on forever. If this type of technology did come about we would have to take a serious and thorough look at how we handle concepts like suicide and euthanasia.
Everyone should be allowed to opt out before the tech is applied and it should be handled with empathy and grace when they decide it’s time later down the track.
The crux of the argument for me is choice. I would like to choose when I am ready to move on from this life and I’d like others to have that same choice.
I am not even 15 seconds in this video and already I am adopting your life motto, definitely a roaring start ;)
Imagine how cool you would be walking into a futuristic space saloon on a colony world, and you get to dramaticallly say that you were born pre immortality, you were there when humans could die, you survived and you were there when humans stopped being burdened by mortality.
Thats badass, and youd be rich as f*** because of compound interest, I've seen futurama, imagine that 600 times over.
This is just so exciting and inspiring. I yearn to be part of the first "immortal " generation. I want to live long enough to go to other planets. Iwant to help guide a steadily expanding family tree for many generations.
Population replacement is adjusted by lengthening lives. People emigrating off Earth also means a need for excess population. It doesn't feel like an issue (especially since we've seen much life extension in the past, as well)
Thanks isaac for covering longevity and life extension! 🎉❤ i hope you cover it again more often in the future, and am happy to see your cool audience of positive comments.
Been Looking forward to this one!
I don't even wanna be immortal. Just 200-500 years in my body of when I was 20 years old would suffice. There's so many things we can do that a single life time just isn't enough to even scratch the surface of the iceberg of opportunities that we have in our short lives. Marriage and procreation would be sensitive topics with such long life spans though.
Just gotta get humanity to start exploring our solar system more.
I am already bored. Imagine living another 100 years...
With all the things available in this modern world, with the biggest library in history ever that is the internet, being bored in this age is just a lack of imagination and curiosity.@@bastiaan7777777
I'm pretty sure it's more or less a myth that young people are more entrepreneurial. The average age for someone founding a big business is in their late 40s.
Jeff Bezos was 30 when he founded Amazon. Bill Gates was 29 when he co-founded Microsoft. Steve Jobs was 21 when he co-founded Apple. Elon Musk founded SpaceX when he was 30. Larry Page and Sergey Brin were both 25 when they created Google. I'm not sure where the late 40s is the average age for founding a big business, but it doesn't seem to be in the technology field.
@@FlintIronstag23i think this is because technology is something that inherently pushes progress , which is mostly something for the youngish , while more traditional businesses need you to have experience in the field you work in to have people trust in you. While technology is more based on innovation
Isaac i was super excited to hear that longevity is your favourite future technology!
Altered Carbon universe explores a lot of these topics, like the Bancrofts, Meths, interstellar colonization, Earth being in a technological/cultural straitjacket, the creative people leaving to the stars, obviously the gap of rich/poor, the most powerful being the oldest, the difference of young humans and Meths in terms of humanity, warfare and how immortality just transformed society in general and the ethics of it. Including how it would transform religion, as shown with the Catholics. Unfortunately the adaptation didn’t live up to the books, especially season 2. Broken Angels and Woken Furies would’ve been nice to see on screen.
I don't think Life extension is a path we would stop pursuing even if it wasn't ethical
I hardly ever post any comments on TH-cam or recommend movies/series to anyone but I'm going to do it this time for the small but select community here. I watched a series called Forever (one season, 10 or so episodes I believe) that I really enjoyed. It's on the topic of immortality a bit. If you enjoyed this video, you might enjoy that series as well.
Cheers everyone!
This is a whole game changer, singularity style.
Nowdays "hey, I made an Orion drive O'Neil cylinder starship, we could go explore close stars, it is a 200 years mission, wanna come?" Answer is "Are you insane? I am not getting in a tin can for the rest of my life, my kids and grandchildren only to find that there is nothing worth there", with life extension "ok, I'll pack some clothes and books and be there"
it would be amazing to be "immortal" no longer have to worry about your personal dreams and achievements in the same way, there would be plenty of time to do the things you want and do them very well. + I would finish my book. Being mortal is waiting to enter the grave, Being immortal is waiting for univesrum to die. etc (; Have a good day everyone !
Perhaps my own discussions are anomalous, but most of the people I have discussed this topic with who are religious were very excited and supportive of the idea of life extension. With the idea that God still has the final say in the length of their lives, removing the negatives of aging won't impact any divine plan. Meanwhile, most of the less religious I've known were very against the idea of life extension. Citing overpopulation and social stratification as inevitable outcomes.
I expect it's something that you'll address later, but my first thought is how would memory keep up with an indefinitely extended lifespan? Do we even know enough about how it works to have an informed guess?
This would be a great episode topic all on its own.
You'd avoid learning skills that are going to change. Driving, computer coding, most things to do with tech. Devices get generally easier and more automatic as time progresses, so you avoid learning tech skills until they stop being necessary altogether.
Forgetting deliberately as a skill will become a thing, too. Can you still remember how to programme a VCR? Now do that on purpose. :P
@@thekaxmax You assume you live in a western county having access to all those tools...
The answer is "just fine." You don't actually remember all that much already ... just what you need to function in day-to-day life, and just enough tiny fragments of the distant past to feel like you have continuity to the "you" of back then ... even if that continuity is largely a fiction.
@@bastiaan7777777 that's pretty well what the video does, yes.
As I perceive it, most of the ethical problems that we typically associate with life extension are really problems of resources, access, and equity that society already faces. Further, if technology or medicine has the ability to unlock longevity, then it will likely be discovered in any future in which humanity continues to advance our scientific understanding. No constraint we could implement would entirely remove this likelihood or prevent those of sufficient dedication from its pursuit, and past a certain point in development, it may become too simple a process to prevent or even restrict. In all likelihood the questions around life extension are ones of how to build an ethical society in a world that includes its reality. Which are, again, already the questions we face now.
I've signed up with Cryonics mate. Found it a good option instead of the stuck in the furnace 😂. Loved stumbling across this channel, ❤
To me, the real problem with this tech is brain data space. People do not realise that we forget things for a reason. Our memory is not infinite. And probably we would at most live 150 years at a time regardless of the body lasting longer than that.
This would create social problems of the sort India have. Castes of people who could not really do anything else because of the dificulty in rediferentiating neurons for new tasks. In a world constantly changing, this is a big problem.
This might sound strange, but I feel life extension is ethical as soon as brain and genetic alteration is understood. Prevent invariability and stagnation and stubborness in culture from a lack of youth refreshing and challenging things and looking on with fresh eyes. Maybe periods of amnesia to see things fresh for 20 years, then have memories returned and properly see things from the inside and outside perspective once in a cycle.
It's not strange, that's a reasonable concern.
Life extension is one of my top topics when it comes to futurism. Though I would also love more videos again going over the topic of resurrection of the long dead (not merely copying them).
Though when it comes to immortality, two things to keep in mind. Statistically eventually everyone will succumb to some cause of death, be it by complications of aging, disease, injury, trauma, sleep deprivation, starvation, dehydration, suffocation, loss of homeostasis due to exposure to the elements, predation, violence, or suicide. True immortality would also mean that there is always more life to live, if reality is truly finite and it is possible to have done everything so often that nothing feels new or worth doing again, then you could argue that even if your existence continues there is no life left to live and therefore not immortal. If immortality is possible, reality must have infinite meaningful state of being to continue to exist in and explore forever.
Another thing to consider with resurrection (if it is possible), is that death does not have to be permanent. Even if someone is truly ready for their life to end, they may have changed their mind in another century. However, if death is not permanent, you can resurrect them once every 100 years or 1000 years or something, have them take life for a month long trial or something and then decide if they want to return to a state of death or continue to live.
P.S. I would also love videos covering different sci-fi visions of society, such as The Culture by Iain M. Banks
That discussion always bring me back to the dragon tale on CGPgray's channel
Not natural - not a concern
Immortality is wrong - no, it isn't
It would get boring - there will always be something new to learn or do, for example 120 years ago we didn't have computers.
Overpopulation - colonize space
Unequal access - that's a real issue, yes, but it could be solved by appropriate laws
Upward mobility - more time to live, more time to get rich, famous, or achieve any status one may want.
Slows technological progress - it would be about the same, people always will want to invent new stuff, even for the heck of it.
Slows cultural change - nope, culture changed so much in my lifetime and I am just 33.
Erodes traditional relationships - even now people live in open relationships or divorce easily, I don't see how it would change.
Ends children - children are annoying anyway
Makes you inhuman - no, it doesn't.
The biggest downside that I can see to major life extension is that there is no way that access to the tech to do so will be equitable. It will be exclusive to the already privileged. We already see the beginning of that in the difference in the quality of health-care available to the rich that isn't available to the poor or the working classes. We will probably find ourselves in a future dominated by long-lived cybernetically augmented ubermensch, lording it over a huge underclass of short-lived workers.😢
The clear solution to me is to mortgage it. It makes perfect sense from a banking perspective.
The thing about this type of technology, is that once it's researched, the application doesn't cost very much. It's all in the R&D, and R&D likes to both continue and get more expensive.
You will likely be able to find black market treatments - you can already get black-market gene therapy. But rightly or wrongly, companies that provide age-extension will seek better methods of it, and will need more funding to do so.
Thus, mortages.
@@Valchrist1313how does making it more expensive solve the poor lacking access? Your solution solves nothing
@@Valchrist1313 : That sounds like a really good idea. 👍
Cell phones were exclusive to the privileged... all tech is like that.
@@kingBing101he talks about , making it available as a payment plan , that you are bound to for as long as you are biologically immortal , which is a perfect business model
Isaac being a philosophical and whatnot got me in tears
The best ending to a particularly difficult day at work. Cheers Isaac 🍻
I offer myself for the medical study of immortality. I'll let you know how unethical and boring it is when I get 200 years.
Generally, I don't respect questions like this. They are generally posed by ideologically/irrationally driven people. But you handled it well in my opinion. It's obvious that any extension of quality of life is good. It's always up to you to make the most of it. So, I say sign me up!
We must always move forward. Things such as AI, life extension etc. will help us do that.
This question reminds me of a sci-fi story I heard on Argo I think here on TH-cam.
Something about how the main character was about to die and was greeted by a representation of a person from the future.
Something about they learned to manipulate electrical signals or something even backwards in time. So once humanity figured that out, they started sending signals of representatives backwards (or maybe pulling the dying ones forward don't remember) and they would tell them about the future and how despite all their advances they don't know what comes after you die but they were meeting with everyone who ever died and offering them a chance to join them in the future in a body just like theirs or of any kind I think. But ultimately it is left up to the person who was being asked if they wanted to pass on naturally or join humanity in the utopian future it built.
Which also vaguely reminds me of another story where humanity would uplift a few members of a species and ask if they wanted to be all uplifted or not. They respected the wishes of those who wished to remain unlifted and earth became home to millions of intelligent species.
The story was titled something along the lines of "Noone gets left behind" iirc. Goes along the lines of "guy gets hit by truck, guy wakes up in a comfy room very much resembling his living room, guy gets offered the chance to live on in the future or die and find out what awaits after death, guy is confused and doesn't know, ends up with the guys father in the future greeting him and stating that 'Noones left behind.' (With an implied 'unless they willingly choose to be.')"
For those who want to give it a read/watch: Channel name was Agro Squirrel narrates, he mostly covers HFY-shortstories (last time I checked at least).
Kinda spoilery but yeah thanks I'll add the proper name of story and channel tyvm
If I can find the story. I searched up yours and it led me to another
Thanks so much
Life extension is not only ethical but perhaps more relevantly necessary. It is the only thing that will save us from impending population-collapse extinction due to mainly anti-traditionalist social "ethics" and experimentation. I expect that in the next 20 years there will be much more research and focus with real treatments and results. At 62 I am keenly interested in this and though I believe in an afterlife I want to stick around to see what I expect to be a wonderous future!
Yes, it's unnatural. So are fridges, phones, and laser eye surgery. I don't know what others think of nature, but I prefer the internet
to cholera.
Happy Arthursday.
I think the biggest issues is having genuinely evil people to keep on living.
why is that a problem? immortality also means we can keep them in prison for time spans suitable for the crime. imagine if hitler served a life sentence for every murder he commited. every crime he committed could be somewhat adequately paid for. it would be better than death.
@@logex621 That would achieve nothing other than giving him more chances to rise into power again, did you forget that he initially became popular when he was in prison?
@@saucevc8353 I think your wrong.
@@logex621 Tell me how you're going to Imprison People like Putin, Xi, Kim, etc who have nukes? It's just endless suffering and we the common folk will have to suffer for it.
Hitler *wouldnt* have survived because he would commit suicide before he was caught. It's victory or death.
“The Gods envy us. They envy us because we're mortal, because any moment might be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we're doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now.” - Achilles played by Brad Pitt in movie Troy
Immortality, eternal youth, and boundless power. I could be wrong, but if the gods are jealous I going to guess I'd be willing to trade with them.
My eventual death doesn't bring more meaning to my life. It ends everything that I am. It makes me feel apathetic and depressed when I think about it too long. Makes me wonder what the point of any of it is if I'm just gonna end. I hesitate more when it comes to what to do with my life, because I have to choose between all the things that interest me.
That season of torchwood was awesome! I wish they'd have taken it farther
If there's anything to take away from this, it's that stalking, and attacking lions with nerf bats would be a meme worthy way to end a seemingly endless existence. That gave me the chuckles.😂
The ethics of life extension are simply a progression of the same ethical questions we deal with now. We exist in a universe of scarcity, so there will ALWAYS be competition over who gets what and how many resources. Whether it's food, medicine, property, or time spent alive, our very existence incurs the cost of entropy. The ONLY ethical option, as far as it goes, is the same as it is now: do not aggress upon peaceful people. This includes anyone deciding whether someone (anyone) does or does not have the right to be alive simply because they require resources to do so, because we ALL do, and that will never change.
My issue primarily is that the vast majority of resource acquisition is tied directly to the length and quality of life. There would be an even more severe difference in resource distribution between those with indefinite lifespans and those without.
The kind of societal upheaval functional immortality would cause is seemingly beyond most people who advocate for it.
It's UNETHICAL to know how to extend life and cure aging but chose not to. THAT is unethical.
Nice job
2:25 That's a good point, actually. I've got to get dinner on, though as usual it's hard to pull away from watching 🙂
What a ridiculous question. So medicine can be unethical because it extends the life? Should we die in our 30ties as our ancestors use to?
Ancient peoples didn't die in their 30s, life expectancy was only that low due to infant and child mortality. If you made it to 20 you were basically guarantee to make it to 80.
@@MrHellknightimp bs
@@MrHellknightimp When did most kings and queens die, Again? Search up a random guy in Wikipedia. Chances are they didn't even make it to 50.
People genuinely did think this in the past, for some new medicinal technologies, like vaccines, or organ transplants.
I am paraphrasing, but in the last book (no spoilers) of the Orion War series by M. D. Cooper (recommended, but start with the Intrpid Saga or Rika's Marauders) there is this fun quote.
"In the grand scheme of things starships appear just an eyeblink after trees, there in nothing more natural."
Love this I'll meet you on your 1000 year anniversary meet up on the moon
Your list of concerns - all of those could also be their inverse given life extension as well. We wouldn't really know until we could see how people react to life extension. So I think it's really based on your own personal intellectual position.
There's a new sci-fi movie Restore Point (Bod Obnovy, first serious Czech* sci-fi after 60 years) which touches some issues common with life extension.
*CZ, SK, PL, SRB co-production