2006-11-23 11:23:10 · 4 answers · asked by John 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Is the question is Aubrey De Grey ONTO something, or just is Aubrey De Grey ON something. I think it's the later. Even if it were possible to stop aging on the cellular level, I don't know that it would transferable to a complex muticellular being. What's more, I don't know that I'd want it to be possible. When I look at the octogenerians and their elders in my own family, it makes me want to check out before I'm seventy. Maybe eighty. In the movie Harold and Maude, Maude commits suicide on her eightieth birthday. Seventy-five is too young, she says, but by eighty-five, you're just marking time.
2006-11-23 11:30:45 · answer #1 · answered by Rico Toasterman JPA 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
De Grey may be as loony as a three dollar bill, but to his credit he has given focus to the problem of aging. If our bodies could be frozen at the age of 20 or 30 the additional creativity of our most intelligent people could be kept going. Einstein was considered the world's smartest person, but by 35 he basically was a has been. As a person who is almost 55 I can feel the difference in my ability to focus on problems and realize I just am not as quick as I once was.
I applaud De Grey in his efforts and wish him well. I may be over the hill, but I still realize that he is trying to think outside the box and many conventional people will find him crazy. In my opinion they are locked into their Christian dogma of life after death. While it will never be possible to live forever, 100 years is way too short a time. And the hope of being youthful until you die is something that would improve our civilization. So much suffering would be eliminated if old age did not mean declining health and weakened bodies. Cheers.
2006-11-26 02:26:37 · answer #2 · answered by elydane 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have not heard of this Aubrey De Grey, but I totally agree with them. I have thought about this much myself, there is no physical law saying that organisms cannot persist an indefinite amount of time. Our cells are constantly being replaced, it's just a matter of keeping that process going at a certain optimal rate, as well as somehow maintaining other body structures like bones and such that break down and don't have many living cells in them, and just keeping everything nice and clean inside. :)
2006-11-23 19:43:59 · answer #3 · answered by Todd 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he is right, or if he figures it out, he better be damn careful who he tells. Most people have blindly accepted as inevitable something that some of us see as a problem to be solved. He will be in grave danger if people start believing him.
2006-11-23 19:36:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋