dont you think the whole world should have trying to increase the life of humans to as long as possible its no. 1 priority? why are we not taking it more seriously? donot you want to live forever? why are we more concerned about economy, wars, global warming etc.? how will it matter with no life?
2007-12-08 06:20:55 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I'd love to live healthily, and without aging, forever (or for many years, at least). If a lot of people would like to do this, it could stop new innocent lives from being born...for the sake of the earth. Would this be fair...would this be moral...would this be right in the eyes of anyone?
2007-12-08 06:33:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are plenty of people. The world is already overpopulated. We are not going to just run out of people. The more we overpopulate, the worse things will be.
The economy is bad.
The world isn't fair. There are some miserable, poor, hungry people out there...
It is more important to increase the quality of life than the length at which it lasts.
People just need to accept their death. It is ridiculous to want to live forever.
Oh, and part of the reason why some people can't live longer is because stem cell research is illegal. I won't get into a rant about that though.
2007-12-08 14:29:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I find it both amusing and alarming the reasons people give for not wanting to live forever. Anyone can cut their life short whenever they want, that is their prerogative. When a person starts arguing for a shorter lifespan for _other_ people, though, I find no humor in that. Logically, arguing that no one else should be allowed to live forever is about the same as arguing for the abolition of all life-extending technologies, including vaccines, heart surgery and pretty much all the rest of medicine.
I too would love to live forever. In contrast to all the pessimists and naysayers who are happy to die after 7 or 8 decades, I for one think life is far too short at present (by many orders of magnitude). There's just way too much to see, learn, do, and experience in a paltry 70-80 years.
That said, things like the economy and wars are important. (I won't argue for global warming though.) Our lives run on economics like a car runs on gas, and a well-developed economy is a prerequisite for having the human, monetary and research capital to engage in serious life-extension research. As for wars, well, they have a nasty habit of killing people quite prematurely before they even live a natural lifespan. As far as I'm concerned, preventing wars is a pretty good life-extension technique.
Regarding the life-extension technologies I think you had in mind, there are indeed scientists engaged in such research, and there is actually some pretty radical stuff in the pipeline, like effective cures for cancer, artificial blood substitutes that could be superior to natural blood, advanced genetic modification, etc. I highly recommend reading "Liberation Biology" by Ronald Bailey. It details a lot of the up-and-coming advances in medical biotech that could allow us to live decades longer. And hopefully, that should be long enough to eventually allow us to live forever....
2007-12-08 15:18:30 · answer #3 · answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tony, do you seriously want to prolong you life? For what?
If we can't even get along today, and the economy, wars and global warming is almost impossible to control, why would you want to live to see a 3rd or 4rh world war.
If there is somthing man has learned from his history is, how to build better weapons and bombs to kill peaple. only when the above you mentioned are in control and the world in peace, can you even think of leaving all this to you children let alone, living longer life. Does any one diagree or agrree?
2007-12-08 14:43:22 · answer #4 · answered by mx. know it all 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are scientist are studying yeast cells DNA that does not break down as bad as our own.
I can't recall all the details but the research is looking at ways to increase natural defense against this type of damage it also mentioned that parakeets live quite long (3 times longer then most animals their size) relative to their size when compared to other animals as a result of such defenses.
So it is not the case that we are not looking into that possibility.
To those that say the world is overpopulated I say yes but the Galaxy is not.
2007-12-08 14:44:06 · answer #5 · answered by mtheoryrules 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, we are doing well at extending life, possibly "forever." The first I heard of it was when Upjohn Pharmacuticals, now called Pfizer, stated in the early 70's they were working on a way to "reset the biological clock." We needed DNA mapping to do that. We now have it. But perhaps before I die in 45 years (according to family history I should live close to 100) I may just be able to have my clock reset, and begin again.
2007-12-08 15:02:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well ........as far as I'm concerned this body does not have a spirit, but rather my spirit has this body for now.
A spirit will live forever, now what you do in the here and now depends on where you spend eternity. With God or without God. So we already have an eternal life.
Where your spirit goes after it loses this husk we hold depends on your present decisions here on earth.
It's all up to you, we call it faith or a lack of faith.
2007-12-08 17:36:53 · answer #7 · answered by the old dog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People always worry about the quantity of life more than the quality and I find that absurd.
A life well lived is long enough no matter what.
2007-12-08 14:41:49 · answer #8 · answered by Clint 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Paranoid Ludditism.
2007-12-09 10:26:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know. When people really start believing in true freedom that's when it will start taking place.
2007-12-08 14:27:36 · answer #10 · answered by lavender tots 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋