Overpopulation is already a problem that humanity is not addressing. The world's population reached one billion at about 1800 CE. Earth's population increased from 6 to 7 billion between 2001 and 2011. If we continue at this exponential rate, one century from now there will not be enough water on earth to construct all the human bodies (which is, as we all know, 80% water) let alone food or natural resources. Questing for immortality seems absolutely ludicrous to me in light of these figures.
i believe their is a scientific theory on how to allow someone to age more slowly than someone on earth: send someone in a rocket going at the speed of light into space for, example, 82 years, if the said person were no older than 12 or 13 and went on that rocket and flew around earth for 82 years they could come back and look much younger then the rest of us, all there friends/relatives might be dead or look really old, and they'd look much younger, say 30, but they'd still be old...
oh and please dont suggest mind uploading. its nonsense. consciousness isnt something you just put in a computer. as so many have explained before,mind uploading would be a copy,not you. mind uploading is one of the reasons people think transhumanism is a joke.
well getiing rid of ageing is going to happen at some point. the human race wonèt be fien with just letting people drop dead at 80 no matter what. and disease can be beaten at some point. how ever, injury will always remain a unbeatable factor. if a war breaks out,humans will never be resistent to bombs. then theres car crashes. not to mention that the universe will end. we can not life forever,its impossable. no matter how old you are,your still a infinate amount of time away from forever.
Depends what kind of immortality is actually possible, stopping the ageing process is Lobster immortality, Lobster are technically immortal the problem for lobsters is probability, the probability of eventual death increases over time due to circumstance, in the case of lobsters it is predators and people sticking them in a boiling pot.
For humans death by probability is far worse, eventually you'll die due to being killed in car accidents, train crashes and fatal workplace injury etc.
Other than lobster style immortality is complete immunity to death, or near immunity, this only works if you are invulnerable enough to escape death by probability, remember the odds of you surviving 1 million yrs for instance may get ruined if an asteroid impact or nuclear war is enough to kill you.
In fact nuclear wars would in such a case be more common place if ordinary weapons are not quiet up to the job.
If a nuclear bomb (direct hit) does the job then people will carry them around.
While living forever would be fascinating, it'd get old. I don't get why the religious seem to think the idea of eternal life is the best gift we could ever, ever, ever be given. Dying is terrifying- but at least it's peaceful! I seriously look forward to death and leaving this fucking planet for good.
@TypoChamp Thats the thing, what if everyone you hold dear live forever as well. Thats what transhumanism opts for. Easily accessable radical life extension. Not only would this benefit the individual, but also society as a whole since an individual will never be too old to work and will never need to be 'old' again. because lets face it, no one wants to grow old.
Interesting response. Even if we did have the mental stamina for immortality after 10,000 years you'd get tired of life and besides the planet couldn't support the monumental increase in population. Death is mother natures cull to keep the herds number down. I imagine the only way the human race would survive is to invent new technologies that allow us to colonise distant planets.
@TypoChamp immortality may not be for everyone, most would simply pull the plug on themselves somewhere down the track. but thats up to them and not their biology to decide when. That being said, the ultimate goal is to expand into other worlds and other planes of existance which implicitely demands humans to be reinvented.
Hey,a world without humans is a world which is a little better!
Actually,even if you die,you don't leave,your parts just spread...
Becoming immortal is...stupid
Even if you CAN be immortal,it's just STUPID.
Reasons?think for yourself what a world of immortal humans will look like...and look at the REAL version,not the utopia you have in mind.
If you want to create aFaster/Better/Harder versions of humans...go ahead,you will find out that it will create a NEW problem,Big one...VERY big...HUGE!!!!
@bassreeves1965 big difference is that through all the known fields of science, it has been proven that life does not exist after death. Whereas, the unborn are incapable of reasoning.
In every story, debate, etc, it seems to be that "immortality would suck" is the only possible outcome, but when we had that debate in school, I had the feeling that this is really forced. We're telling ourselves it would suck because we have to deal with being mortal, but no one really wants to die. And about the stagnation thing: People evolve and develop as individual, especially if you keep their brains from aging...
Altair...right on the mark nail on the head so isnt hell or heaven ,living forever, ugh i dont want to go there (either one) so prolong life here, well only if it gives a useful help to others wooooo , helping them to live a few moments longer? methusela, for instance?
A few quadrillion revolutions back up the vortex we are falling down would be a good place to find the people who have all died. it's called the past, which is closer to the surface of this black hole we call a universe. your postulate seems 3 dimensional to me. As for death and immortality, the only thing to fear is living forever in a reality of another entities' construct. You know the saying, "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
I want my mind to be uploaded to a supercomputer in control of an army of robots. Then all you mortals wouldn't have to worry about the petty issues created by immortality anymore. Because I will be the real problem.
Godless, I've encountered so many of these terrible arguments on the subject of death and immortality and fearing death all of the time. And I make a lot of the same sorts of rebuttals, often sadly alone in a sea of pro-death. But you have worded all of the rebuttals so perfectly. You are not only logical, but eloquent. I really wish this video was there for every argument revolving around death. It would serve society and the argument well.
We are immortal, when we die people think THAT'S IT, IT'S THE END. But it's not..it's just a transition to the after life. Look i don't think there's anyway of converting you ZJemptv but at least i know i tried...
do you wear a parachute when you sky dive? buckle up when driving the highway? wear a helmet when on motorcycle? watch your step when walking along a cliff? look both ways before crossing the street? eat a decent diet so you dont clog your arteries? cry at funerals? thank god when you come close to death? if you answered yes to any of those, i question whether you truly believe death is not the end.
@payasoinfeliz Why not enjoy both? It's a waste to loose one, anyways if u did harm urself on purpose such as suicide u'd be going to hell 4 that. The life we live now is very important because it decides where we go in the afterlife by the way we act ( hell, purgatory, heaven etc )
because the other one is unknown, so more exciting. plus, i hear thats the better life, and its forever. im not saying commit suicide, but most folks who believe they get to live forever seem to be super careful with the only life they really know theyll have... our life now decides where we go later? i guess if you die young and pure, youre better off. more sin when you get older...
@payasoinfeliz Well sometimes we don't live long and pure, we sometimes live long and hard but what would you do without faith? If i didn't have faith in what i believed in i would be lost, the meaning of life wouldn't seem so important to me and i'd just be doing whatever i want. But that's not me, i would want to live long and happy, and suffer some pain along the way, why, because most people who go to heaveen have endured pain in their lives. They still kept their faith..
when have you not had faith? when were you an atheist? so if you cant live a second life, the first one is meaningless? what makes the second life meaningful? is there a third life after the second one?
@payasoinfeliz I was never an atheist and never will be. And no the first life isn't meaningless but if there let's say was no God i wouldn't find life to be much interesting, i'd live it and enjoy it but not endure the love of God if there was no God. And that my friend is terribly depressing. And the second life is meaningful because it's eternity, there is no 3rd life because the 2nd is forever. Ur 2nd life can be good..or bad. The way u live ur life chooses.
so, how do you know you would be lost without faith? youre obviously not speaking from experience... well, if you say the first life isnt meaningless, then there is no need for a god that gives you a second life for you to have meaning. you said the 1st life is meaningful, and seems you think the second life is more meaningful because it is eternity. so the longer you live, the more meaningful your life? what if i die at an older age than a priest or saint. my life was more meaningful?
@payasoinfeliz Ugh no, the first life is meaningful mostly because the 1st life is a test, the way we live our life chooses the way we live our 2nd life, in a bad way or a good way. And no the longer doesn't mean it's more meaningful. The 2nd life is my opinion is more meaningful because if lets say you go to heaven you get to be with God and all your love ones ETC. In the 1st life we can't do that. Both life's are very meaningful. I just think the 2nd is more.
if its only meaningful as a test to qualify for the second, then without the second life, your first life has no meaning. so, the first life, in and of itself, is meaningless. you cant be with god and loved ones in the first life? i think many have loved ones and god in their first life. so i dont think that distinguishes 1st from 2nd life.
im asking for simple answers from you personally. if you are unhappy with how i perceive your opinions, you should read over them and see if you really hold them. theres a fair bit of logical disconnect between things youre saying. maybe you need to do some soul searching.
I may have come up with an answer to keep immortality while, at the very least, not making the overpopulation problem much worse. In order to receive the indefinite lifespan, you must have a vasectomy or tubal ligation first. Also, you must not have any children beforehand. This way, you have a choice. You can either live forever or you can have offspring, but you can't have both.
For one thing if it were possible, then we should already have alien life forms living among us who were able to overcome the distances between planets or it may mean that it may not be possible to design spaceships to travel fast enough for serious space exploration. That speed of light limit may be the problem there. Still, an alien aboard a space ship could arrive in say another billion years. Will we still be here though?
Why not die just now ? Yeah, not really a good answer. We might get to a point where living longer would actually decrease wellbeing (Imho I'd rather be dead then depressed and immortal I don't know about you). Just because living 100 years like a 30 year old sounds awesome doesn't mean it will be, nor does it mean living a 1000 years or more like a 30 year old will be.
Ernst Becker suggests that religion (or patriotism or other forms of heroism) are our way to handle the stress of being aware of our death. They are a kind of fantasy of immortality (from what I understood).
A very good movie about the pursuit of immortality, worth checking out by those interested on the psychological/anthropological aspects of the topic: "Flight from Death" by Patrick Shen.
@bullfrog11758 Jehovah, now you're saying he passed it on to his kid but won't share it with us? That seems greedy. Nepotism, you know? I mean, first of all, why won't he share, and if he can do this amazing thing, why doesn't he anymore? He can't be dead, so that means he chooses to let people die needlessly.
If we wanted to be immortal, we would have to evolve to a point where we occupy no space, i.e. Avatars in a virtual world. Computing technology will eventually get to the point where an entire universe could be contained in a hard drive. There would have to be some way to be "born into" this virtual universe. At that point, we wouldn't really be human anymore. Any foray into the "real" world would be through cyber-shells or some other simulacra, in case something "out there" needed to be fixed
This sounds very much like an argument in the nerdiest of Harry Potter fics: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.
I totally agree with the striving for longer lifespans and effective immortality. I love the idea of living long enough to learn more science then one can possibly fit into the average lifespan and well into when space exploration becomes feasible.
@1:30 Why do we have to do anything about it? The value of our lives would be diminished if we were able to live forever. It would be like winning the lottery and being the last person on Earth. What's the point?
Give it up ZJ. I CHALLENGE YOU to watch my video and make a RESPONSE! It's OVER! There is nothing to be found in your foul vision other than madness and an insensitivity to the suffering of others in order for YOU to get where you want to get to! Stop this pernicious meme you're spreading I BEG YOU! For the sake of the little boy in my video. If you value logic and reason as you say, stop chasing after fool's gold and accept defeat gracefully. Thank you.
you have a weird way of talking, you sound like you are heavily focused on reading off a script or something, not trying to antagonize, just trying to help.
@ZJemptv But would lower the Abortion rate hugely Stopping younger people from having children. Even better is the possibility of Artificial Gene mixing The possibility of making Humans with a small amount of Fish RNA allowing them to have double Organs lungs and gills but even then theres the issue of pressure or Ruining a human gene. Even the possibility of making Flying humans Making travel much easier Biologists should center on this not immortality.
@ZJemptv immortality wouldn't be good We would be tortured by it. And we need Evolution its a possibility that we evolve into Super humans and the possibility of Biologists will perfect Gene choosing Allowing them to create smarter stronger healthier and longer living humans also getting rid of Disabilities early on sickness and Near perfect immune systems Stopping Aids Cancer and anything else Also we could Fix are genes to make us Mate later in life which would slow down growth slightly But
btw im sure an intelligent amount of people would think imortality is stupid anyway. i for one dont want to live forever do u ever stop to wonder what that would even be like? im not saying we cant do it im saying why should we just like your saying why not
@MrMeineNamen You would still be able to commit suicide any time you wanted. Unless you think it would be a bad thing (religion teaches that and says suicide is the "ultimate sin") so why not pursuit immortality and get to live for as long as you want? With immortality we have 2 choices. To live forever (or a LOT) and the choice to die whenever we want but without immortality the only choice is to die (and not when we want) so how does an intelligent amount of people think immortality is stupid?
@fablan6 because many REAL scientists believe it would destroy or corrupt the very fabric and purpose of mankind. of course i understand your point it is literally a matter of reality and fiction. this earth and its resources could not handle and care for a huge live whenever they want populace. scientists believe (educatedly) on the theory of natural selection
@MrMeineNamen Corrupt us? More? As for the earth maintaining us that's just a matter of choice. We are stupid that's why earth can't sustain us. Normally, if we weren't so stupid the earth could maintain 10 times our numbers. We use way more than we need. Of course if we all became immortal tomorrow with our stupidity we wouldn't be able to handle it good, but I am talking about immortality in general, let's say after we learned how to dismiss religions and stopped all wars etcetera.
@fablan6 religion has nothing to do with it. religion is just a faith in a belief. religious wars? maybe. but no not 10 times our amount. the earth cannot sustain us because of resources, room, ect. immortality is just as probable in success as world peace is... not very likely
@MrMeineNamen If we used our resources in the correct way it would. But if we reached the point were we could make ourselves immortal and even use it (cause if we found it today most probably it would be hidden like so many other inventions that could make our lives better but the rich would lose money etc) then I am sure we would be able of other things as well by then, like inhabiting other planets.
Pure consciousness, which is the real self, the real 'I' is timeless & therefore deathless. It is the underlying reality, the unchanging platform from which the non self (intellect, mind, emotions, personality, sensations, gender, sexuality etc) are all observed. Your error is that you have not realised the essential unchanging self. You mistake the self to be part of the phenomenal world, and from this first error, your subsequent idea about death being the end of your existence is a mistake.
You've missed a major point here. Have you not considered that the primary reason for humans enjoying their lives in the first place, is because we WILL eventually die. I mean, its what strives human accomplishment and ambition; the fact that we all know that eventually who time will expire. Afterall, if one was immortal, what would give you these motavations if you had eternity to forfill them. 'Too much of a good thing' is an idiom that comes to mind here.
@video: living a really long time is undesirable for me because the body becomes so inhibited wit age. mobility slows down, learning slows down, dependance on meds increases, beauty is gone in the obvious ways, ur no longer looked at as a bein with a right 2 a sexuality, etc. there is a point 2 living, helping others, making one's self more positive and others positive/happy. there r 2 many people on the planet as it is and more people living 4ever would increase the burden on the planet
@GrizzlyBloodclaw some would say that even genetically-identiacal twins r different people wit different personalities. r we nothing more then the sum of our experiences and our genetical make up? this comes 2 the debate of the soul. does it exist and so on.
@GrizzlyBloodclaw u wouldn't really need cloning to upload the memories. u could hold on2 the disk until the infintile brain is able 2 hold on2 it reliably. the problem is that experience shapes who we r. we aren't the same people @ 50 that we were @ 12. no one stops being shaped by thier experiences till they're dead. there lies the problem. the clone could b put in2 a coma where the body grows and devlops and the brain has no experiences. but is it the same person then? some would cont below:
If retainment of memories means immortality, good luck. Memories can still be altered. That is the fallacy of transhumanism, and even humanism. How do you know your memories and thoughts haven't already been altered? That would be equivalent to asking how do you know you haven't already died.
I think DNA is superior and is vastly misunderstood.
The person would then be dead or digital. Digital is still technically dead.
The moral and ethical dilemmas arrive in this aspect, which the reality is that death can not be escaped, nor should it be.
Personally, I think we most likely already are immortal. We just don't know it, which there is no such thing as death. That is how death is religious, the belief that death is the absolute, the end.
And there, abiding quietly, timelessly, purely and eternally, at the back of all words, all thoughts and all intellectualizing is the subjective entity, the observer, the awareness, the pure consciousness, the real self or 'I' (known, by some as the soul, the atma, a 'particle of God'). It cannot be realized by means of words, thoughts and intellectualizing. Too much Intellectualism is anathema to the mystic for it leads consciousness outward, away from truth and into the maze of speculation.
@bhuridajanah I disagree. intellectualism has brought sanity 2 the debate of religion, morals, and bringing people 2 realize slavery is wrong and all people r equal
@cruelbusiness1984 Im not saying it hasn't. I'm saying the more the real self (pure consciousness) gets drawn out into non self (intellectualism, mind, body) then the harder it is to realise the truth of who you are. Meditation is the method realised as best for self realisation, intellectualism is fine for many worldly things, as you rightly say. But intellectualism is not given as the method for attaining self realisation. You have to use the appropriate method if you want the right result.
@dmgirl3000 I know the problem isn't tech itself - tech is a good thing. Its just people always seem too stupid to implement our tech intelligently. I'll see if I can find that book; thanks ;)
You know more than you want to know to formulate an opinion, but not enough of what you need to know to critique their opinions. Also, freak is never the proper term to refer to anyone. You may be bigoted, but I don't call you a freak for it.
Maybe you should go crawl into a little corner of isolation if you are so afraid of viewpoints other than your own. Lord knows we don't need another closed minded fool bogging down intelligent conversation.
you would probably still age and remain living. If it is a forever young sort of thing then that would be awesome. Then again if we continue multiplying and people would be forced to die eventually and most defiantly in certain situations.
I don't thank sceince for making reproduction possible for sterile people. They should adopt one of the thousands of children that need a home instead. I could only condone searching for immortality once we have found an equilibrium with our world.
I believe the largest problem we have with the science we currently use is our failure for long-term thought. We go ahead and start pumping things out for mass use before we are aware of the side-effects so yes - I do believe that you should not impliment a technology until it has been thorougly gone over and all possible sceineros accounted for with answers to possible problems. cont...
The idea that we could all live longer without it taking anything away from others is horseshit. As it is, many people in the world are suffering so that Americans can have the quality of life that we do. In order for what your saying to be acheived the human population would need to be MUCH smaller. People do need to limit the amount of children they have - like it or not. Its called responsiblity - it makes me angry that people are so short-sighted and selfish on this topic. cont...
I have a serious problem with the fact that our planet is being utterly destroyed, but the rich would rather invest their money in immortatliy for themselves. It makes me want to smash their labs and use the money to feed the poor, provide funds for abortions and grow organic farms. Our strain on the Earth is something that we have to fix in THIS generation - period. cont...
Things are meant to die. The belief that we are better than nature (which is highly stressed in religions) is why the Earth and all the organisms in it are suffering. Our lives require the constant consumption of other life forms. The only way to extend life and not risk running out of resources for everyone is to start policing births - do you want to do that? (I have wanted to for years but that's besides point). cont...
There is no solution to death. Carl Sagen said: "The keys to evolution are time and death". In other words, we need to get out of the way. We are meant to die just like everything else in the universe. The statement: "We are not obligated to ensure evolution continues" is one of the most selfish and self-absorbed things I've ever heard. cont...
The reason for our current overpopulation is the result of people living much longer than we used to. This has resulted in a much higher strain on our Earth. Wanting to avoid death is not just like religion; however it is a major reason that religion was dreamed up - in other words it is coming from the same place of fear or inability to let go. cont...
It is true that we don't have all the answers, but I don't think our bodies are biologically equipped to sustain our lives infinitely. That's just not how life seems to work. Rather, it seems to be in line with the old cliche "circle of life" concept. Sure, we can increase our average life spans and hopefully quality of living, but in all honesty, the difference between that and infinity is the difference between throwing a bullet and shooting it. We don't even understand infinity that well.
They're slowly making it possible to live forever, but you have to be an embryo to have it. I forgot exactly what they strengthen, but it's something in the cells, which makes the newer cells stronger. So you'll stay at your prime state (around 21 years of age) for around 400 years, unless something (i.e. a bus hitting you) intervenes.
If I could choose to live for 100 years longer, then I probably will, then I would probably take up that offer. But I would never want to live forever. I don't know. It's just something inside me that screams, "NO! THAT'S NOT RIGHT!"
The really interesting aspect of near immortality or merely very long lives, is the social and economic changes it would necessitate. People would not be satisfied with flipping burgers for 10,000 years. On the other hand, not everyone is resourceful enough to find something interesting to do even if there were unlimited resources and opportunities. Legalised and assisted suicide would probably become a social necessity (Which would take care of overpopulation).
So, I don't argue that immortality in some absolute sense (as we'd need to define it) is unethical. Change is inevitable. And to persist as a species at all (individually or collectively), the ability to adapt to this change is commensurately indispensable. The only unethical act is to move forward with radical life extension without considering the reasons nature has so overwhelming and deeply selected for this curious trait called "death".
Where was I? Oh yes, the pot must be stirred occasionally (and paradoxically) to maintain relevance to dynamic environment, increase cultural order (e.g. hunter/gather, agriculture, monarchy, democracy, ad infinitum), and generally put more adaptable potential in the bank.
In a sense we are immortal as long as our species remains on this planet. Without nature's innovation of death, we need to replace it with a similar means to persist and adapt.
An immortal population that cohered a couple hundred years ago would need some way to do what nature has already selected for; namely, introduce intermittent disorder necessary to maintain vital diversity and capacity for adaptability. Here in lies the paradox of life: continued levels of order actually require a measure of inherent disorder to maintain the capacity for potential for integration. The pot must be stirred every now and again to increase in order, maintain...
Immortality at our current state of evolution is problematic because our brains go through a definitive cycle of more to less plasticity over a lifetime. This cycle has co-evolve with the cycle of life and death. To reach a state of minimum plasticity, and then preserving it in perpetuity, is to tend towards over-coherence as a species. The likely result is a lack of diversity as the species over-coheres on ideas that solidified in an increasingly irrelevant environment...
I, of course, haven't argued yet that immortality, if it is possible, is intrinsically unethical. I will make that case.
Persistence of any form, e.g. life, is predicated on a balance between saliency (or distinctness of form) and the simultaneous integration of that form with its surroundings. This balance creates a tension between over-coherence, i.e. the tendency to cohere on oneself, and under-coherence, i.e. the opposite...
If one is not concerned about the longevity of our lineage then I would argue that they are selfish, because species survival is very rare. Life is sparse in the universe, in general, and to not consider the implication of such a radical departure from what has served survival for the vast majority of persistent lineages is not an adaptive trait; and in its solipsism, I respectfully argue that such disregard is unethical...
Nature selected for death of the individual for a reason. There are species on this planet that live forever in the sense that their adaptation to the changing environment is more continuous than that of the vast majority of plants and animals like ourselves. But as we have and will continue to lengthen our lives (a forgone conclusion), we must beg the question of why nature has selected for intermittent death if we are interested in the longevity of our lineage...
overpopulation would be a big problem, but it would still be nice to be able to decide when you die, especially when you work at something.Some expert cancer researchers that live a hundred years longer could make far more progress than new researchers who have to learn all this progress from scratch and start over again.
Immortality needs to be held off until we start infesting other planets. We need to be able to keep having children to continue improving the species, and stuck on this one rock we can't live for crazy long time periods. Especially with those annoying people with 5 kids in 5 years. give them 500 years and they will have a few hundred mouth breathers yelling in the grocery stores
Immortality is a fact of life which already exists, science is just beginning to become aware of the existence of our spiritual essence which is the real entity. This physical existence is merely a projection of our consciousness which is the ONLY thing that's real. Don't mistake this with the bullshit the churches peddle, ingest a "heroic" dose of LSD and you'll understand what I mean.
@ZJemptv The last point is the main reason I would be against immortality.Over population would definitely be the result at this stage of our development.There could be two answers to this 1)You only give the gift of immortality to those of great accomplishment.Like a scientist whose theory had revolutionized our world or something or 2) You hold off on dispensing it until humans are space faring.Either way can't see it in my lifetime.
It would be very exiting to study the psychological effects of living 300 years. Could you reatch the limit of your long term memory? Will you aquire more and more bugs in your mental system? How far could you push it?
Personally I don't want to live forever, and i cant rely offer a good reason for it. It feels kinda like having your cake and eating it too. I guess death kinda loses it's sting after a few hundred years.
There is no reason to have to limit birthrates. There is plenty of space on the earth for mankind,even trillions can live here.The problem isn't space it's food.we would have to convert the ocean into a big algae farm for food.orgrow it in greenhouses on the moon or underground.once the launch to space cost go down far enough it wont matter.population pressure has always been a driving force for expansion.given a mass ground to orbit transprt system(ei elevato)people who dont like it will leave.
We're going to have to start restricting birthrates within the next 100 years anyway, or we will all run out of food. Great video ZJ, points well made.
Having longer lifespans, is certainly something I think we should strive for, I'm in total agreement with Zinnia on that one.
And in so much as immortality is currently impossible, so what we are looking as, is so far just the possibility of having longer life-spans; while it would increase some problems with over-population, I think it might also bring the already big problem of over-population, to the forefront of our 'to do list'.
Perhaps allowing us serious consideration of solutions.
I wish you knew what I know. You can not see the kingdom of God unless you seek it. The further you are from God the less you will know him because your heart will become harden by the world. Matter can not be made, but we are all made of matter so what is matter?
Overpopulation is already a problem that humanity is not addressing. The world's population reached one billion at about 1800 CE. Earth's population increased from 6 to 7 billion between 2001 and 2011. If we continue at this exponential rate, one century from now there will not be enough water on earth to construct all the human bodies (which is, as we all know, 80% water) let alone food or natural resources. Questing for immortality seems absolutely ludicrous to me in light of these figures.
thrashinskullz 2 days ago
Living forever would get kind of boring. Life is partially enjoyable because of it being finite.
cynicalskunk8 3 days ago
Death is like before we were born, It sounds peaceful don't fear it.
x700noob007x 1 week ago
i believe their is a scientific theory on how to allow someone to age more slowly than someone on earth: send someone in a rocket going at the speed of light into space for, example, 82 years, if the said person were no older than 12 or 13 and went on that rocket and flew around earth for 82 years they could come back and look much younger then the rest of us, all there friends/relatives might be dead or look really old, and they'd look much younger, say 30, but they'd still be old...
lexalina132 1 week ago
oh and please dont suggest mind uploading. its nonsense. consciousness isnt something you just put in a computer. as so many have explained before,mind uploading would be a copy,not you. mind uploading is one of the reasons people think transhumanism is a joke.
1metallica1 1 week ago
well getiing rid of ageing is going to happen at some point. the human race wonèt be fien with just letting people drop dead at 80 no matter what. and disease can be beaten at some point. how ever, injury will always remain a unbeatable factor. if a war breaks out,humans will never be resistent to bombs. then theres car crashes. not to mention that the universe will end. we can not life forever,its impossable. no matter how old you are,your still a infinate amount of time away from forever.
1metallica1 1 week ago
Use edo tensei and you can regenerate also never die.
wcrolas990 1 week ago
i think she's very smart, why are you people not hearing what she says?
jessicalilac 3 weeks ago
Depends what kind of immortality is actually possible, stopping the ageing process is Lobster immortality, Lobster are technically immortal the problem for lobsters is probability, the probability of eventual death increases over time due to circumstance, in the case of lobsters it is predators and people sticking them in a boiling pot.
For humans death by probability is far worse, eventually you'll die due to being killed in car accidents, train crashes and fatal workplace injury etc.
MDEMONIC689 1 month ago
Other than lobster style immortality is complete immunity to death, or near immunity, this only works if you are invulnerable enough to escape death by probability, remember the odds of you surviving 1 million yrs for instance may get ruined if an asteroid impact or nuclear war is enough to kill you.
In fact nuclear wars would in such a case be more common place if ordinary weapons are not quiet up to the job.
If a nuclear bomb (direct hit) does the job then people will carry them around.
MDEMONIC689 1 month ago
We can't do this...If we all live forever, and nobody dies, we will have a much, much worse population problem. ^_^
YoungMangaka 1 month ago
right on! well articulated response. but why does she sound like a robot? lol.
ngusumakofu1 1 month ago
Do you write all your own talks yourself?
Mystery207 1 month ago in playlist More videos from ZJemptv
i like this
i always wanted to stretch my life to make some difference
Jathniel3 2 months ago
transgender?
RzaChess 2 months ago
fewer babys !!!!!!!!!
katlova16 2 months ago
i believe in god and she still has a point.
rageingtiger00 3 months ago
While living forever would be fascinating, it'd get old. I don't get why the religious seem to think the idea of eternal life is the best gift we could ever, ever, ever be given. Dying is terrifying- but at least it's peaceful! I seriously look forward to death and leaving this fucking planet for good.
FollyxXxFallen 3 months ago in playlist More videos from ZJemptv
dress like a girl all you want but i can still see a bulging adam's apple and hear a manly voice. also, you sound like a fucking robot when you talk.
jatzy 3 months ago
i know your gay but please dress as a man you scare me...
drag0ncIaws 3 months ago
is that a man?
Nick4show 3 months ago
@Nick4show Yes stop asking
joshjh47 1 week ago in playlist More videos from ZJemptv
Who the hell would wanna live forever. Knowing you'll see every person you love grow old and die for all eternity. It would drive you to madness.
TypoChamp 3 months ago
@TypoChamp Thats the thing, what if everyone you hold dear live forever as well. Thats what transhumanism opts for. Easily accessable radical life extension. Not only would this benefit the individual, but also society as a whole since an individual will never be too old to work and will never need to be 'old' again. because lets face it, no one wants to grow old.
AlternateArtisan 3 months ago
@AlternateArtisan
Interesting response. Even if we did have the mental stamina for immortality after 10,000 years you'd get tired of life and besides the planet couldn't support the monumental increase in population. Death is mother natures cull to keep the herds number down. I imagine the only way the human race would survive is to invent new technologies that allow us to colonise distant planets.
TypoChamp 3 months ago
@TypoChamp immortality may not be for everyone, most would simply pull the plug on themselves somewhere down the track. but thats up to them and not their biology to decide when. That being said, the ultimate goal is to expand into other worlds and other planes of existance which implicitely demands humans to be reinvented.
AlternateArtisan 3 months ago
Hey,a world without humans is a world which is a little better!
Actually,even if you die,you don't leave,your parts just spread...
Becoming immortal is...stupid
Even if you CAN be immortal,it's just STUPID.
Reasons?think for yourself what a world of immortal humans will look like...and look at the REAL version,not the utopia you have in mind.
If you want to create aFaster/Better/Harder versions of humans...go ahead,you will find out that it will create a NEW problem,Big one...VERY big...HUGE!!!!
Wharwulif 3 months ago
What if your lide si ned so bad and your immortal no matter what you do you cant kill yourself.
zoidberg96913 4 months ago
@zoidberg96913 that won't happen, because all you have to do is stop taking your anti-aging pills.
AlternateArtisan 3 months ago
none knows what death is, I'll bet the embryol thinks birth from the womb is death
Thats why most cry. What if the embryol finds a way to"live" forever in the womb.
bassreeves1965 4 months ago
@bassreeves1965 big difference is that through all the known fields of science, it has been proven that life does not exist after death. Whereas, the unborn are incapable of reasoning.
AlternateArtisan 3 months ago
In every story, debate, etc, it seems to be that "immortality would suck" is the only possible outcome, but when we had that debate in school, I had the feeling that this is really forced. We're telling ourselves it would suck because we have to deal with being mortal, but no one really wants to die. And about the stagnation thing: People evolve and develop as individual, especially if you keep their brains from aging...
KendrixTermina 4 months ago 2
Altair...right on the mark nail on the head so isnt hell or heaven ,living forever, ugh i dont want to go there (either one) so prolong life here, well only if it gives a useful help to others wooooo , helping them to live a few moments longer? methusela, for instance?
ricglos 4 months ago
Death is progress. All humans must die.
Thiswaybefore 4 months ago
Has anyone watched any of the videos of Aubrey de Grey?
endthedisease 5 months ago
A few quadrillion revolutions back up the vortex we are falling down would be a good place to find the people who have all died. it's called the past, which is closer to the surface of this black hole we call a universe. your postulate seems 3 dimensional to me. As for death and immortality, the only thing to fear is living forever in a reality of another entities' construct. You know the saying, "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
AltairZielite 5 months ago
I want my mind to be uploaded to a supercomputer in control of an army of robots. Then all you mortals wouldn't have to worry about the petty issues created by immortality anymore. Because I will be the real problem.
eddiminus 5 months ago
I certainly don't want to die. I love living and I don't want to not exist.
LightBlueFuture 5 months ago 2
Godless, I've encountered so many of these terrible arguments on the subject of death and immortality and fearing death all of the time. And I make a lot of the same sorts of rebuttals, often sadly alone in a sea of pro-death. But you have worded all of the rebuttals so perfectly. You are not only logical, but eloquent. I really wish this video was there for every argument revolving around death. It would serve society and the argument well.
TearofFriendship 5 months ago
If you gather all seven dragon's balls you can wish for immortality that way. Duh!
shadowtitus 5 months ago 30
@shadowtitus Ahhh, the one wish no one seemed to get around to. XD
JackDextrus 5 months ago
@shadowtitus Oh please! I'll stuff you in the dead zone if you ever become immortal.
saiyanmage 2 months ago
You sure do act like you know everything for someone who has barely hit puberty. LOL!
dragoon04 5 months ago
We are immortal, when we die people think THAT'S IT, IT'S THE END. But it's not..it's just a transition to the after life. Look i don't think there's anyway of converting you ZJemptv but at least i know i tried...
God bless, i'll pray for you.
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
do you wear a parachute when you sky dive? buckle up when driving the highway? wear a helmet when on motorcycle? watch your step when walking along a cliff? look both ways before crossing the street? eat a decent diet so you dont clog your arteries? cry at funerals? thank god when you come close to death? if you answered yes to any of those, i question whether you truly believe death is not the end.
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz We do that for our safety, if we didn't do that why don't we just kill ourselves? God wants us to enjoy life while we still have it
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
safety from what? the after life? lol. after life is still life, is it not? so go enjoy that one instead.
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz Why not enjoy both? It's a waste to loose one, anyways if u did harm urself on purpose such as suicide u'd be going to hell 4 that. The life we live now is very important because it decides where we go in the afterlife by the way we act ( hell, purgatory, heaven etc )
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
because the other one is unknown, so more exciting. plus, i hear thats the better life, and its forever. im not saying commit suicide, but most folks who believe they get to live forever seem to be super careful with the only life they really know theyll have... our life now decides where we go later? i guess if you die young and pure, youre better off. more sin when you get older...
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz Well sometimes we don't live long and pure, we sometimes live long and hard but what would you do without faith? If i didn't have faith in what i believed in i would be lost, the meaning of life wouldn't seem so important to me and i'd just be doing whatever i want. But that's not me, i would want to live long and happy, and suffer some pain along the way, why, because most people who go to heaveen have endured pain in their lives. They still kept their faith..
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
when have you not had faith? when were you an atheist? so if you cant live a second life, the first one is meaningless? what makes the second life meaningful? is there a third life after the second one?
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz I was never an atheist and never will be. And no the first life isn't meaningless but if there let's say was no God i wouldn't find life to be much interesting, i'd live it and enjoy it but not endure the love of God if there was no God. And that my friend is terribly depressing. And the second life is meaningful because it's eternity, there is no 3rd life because the 2nd is forever. Ur 2nd life can be good..or bad. The way u live ur life chooses.
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
so, how do you know you would be lost without faith? youre obviously not speaking from experience... well, if you say the first life isnt meaningless, then there is no need for a god that gives you a second life for you to have meaning. you said the 1st life is meaningful, and seems you think the second life is more meaningful because it is eternity. so the longer you live, the more meaningful your life? what if i die at an older age than a priest or saint. my life was more meaningful?
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz Ugh no, the first life is meaningful mostly because the 1st life is a test, the way we live our life chooses the way we live our 2nd life, in a bad way or a good way. And no the longer doesn't mean it's more meaningful. The 2nd life is my opinion is more meaningful because if lets say you go to heaven you get to be with God and all your love ones ETC. In the 1st life we can't do that. Both life's are very meaningful. I just think the 2nd is more.
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
if its only meaningful as a test to qualify for the second, then without the second life, your first life has no meaning. so, the first life, in and of itself, is meaningless. you cant be with god and loved ones in the first life? i think many have loved ones and god in their first life. so i dont think that distinguishes 1st from 2nd life.
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz OMG there's no way getting through your thick skull! How bout doing some religious research EH? Gosh!
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
im asking for simple answers from you personally. if you are unhappy with how i perceive your opinions, you should read over them and see if you really hold them. theres a fair bit of logical disconnect between things youre saying. maybe you need to do some soul searching.
payasoinfeliz 6 months ago
@payasoinfeliz Dude i'm 12 years old. I just don't understand the long words that u say. OKAYYYYY :O
TheGaGa2468 6 months ago
You sound like a dude.
zSanosake 7 months ago
@zSanosake Because he is a "dude."
D0p3Smuggl3r 7 months ago
I may have come up with an answer to keep immortality while, at the very least, not making the overpopulation problem much worse. In order to receive the indefinite lifespan, you must have a vasectomy or tubal ligation first. Also, you must not have any children beforehand. This way, you have a choice. You can either live forever or you can have offspring, but you can't have both.
TheCeejReturns 7 months ago
I love you
shredh3d 7 months ago
For one thing if it were possible, then we should already have alien life forms living among us who were able to overcome the distances between planets or it may mean that it may not be possible to design spaceships to travel fast enough for serious space exploration. That speed of light limit may be the problem there. Still, an alien aboard a space ship could arrive in say another billion years. Will we still be here though?
dkw12002 8 months ago
Why not die just now ? Yeah, not really a good answer. We might get to a point where living longer would actually decrease wellbeing (Imho I'd rather be dead then depressed and immortal I don't know about you). Just because living 100 years like a 30 year old sounds awesome doesn't mean it will be, nor does it mean living a 1000 years or more like a 30 year old will be.
ForYeensSake 8 months ago
Ernst Becker suggests that religion (or patriotism or other forms of heroism) are our way to handle the stress of being aware of our death. They are a kind of fantasy of immortality (from what I understood).
A very good movie about the pursuit of immortality, worth checking out by those interested on the psychological/anthropological aspects of the topic: "Flight from Death" by Patrick Shen.
xba2007 8 months ago
@bullfrog11758 Jehovah, now you're saying he passed it on to his kid but won't share it with us? That seems greedy. Nepotism, you know? I mean, first of all, why won't he share, and if he can do this amazing thing, why doesn't he anymore? He can't be dead, so that means he chooses to let people die needlessly.
Utterbach 8 months ago
@bullfrog11758 I thought you said only the Almighty can, this Jehovah guy. Also, I don't really care about that other crap.
Utterbach 8 months ago
@bullfrog11758 Well, he hasn't done it lately, has he?
Utterbach 8 months ago
If we wanted to be immortal, we would have to evolve to a point where we occupy no space, i.e. Avatars in a virtual world. Computing technology will eventually get to the point where an entire universe could be contained in a hard drive. There would have to be some way to be "born into" this virtual universe. At that point, we wouldn't really be human anymore. Any foray into the "real" world would be through cyber-shells or some other simulacra, in case something "out there" needed to be fixed
mostritegod 9 months ago
This sounds very much like an argument in the nerdiest of Harry Potter fics: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.
I totally agree with the striving for longer lifespans and effective immortality. I love the idea of living long enough to learn more science then one can possibly fit into the average lifespan and well into when space exploration becomes feasible.
siliconsciousness 9 months ago
to live is meaningless, to die is meaningless. All that has meaning is to create God, inside and outside ourselves.
valken666 9 months ago
@1:30 Why do we have to do anything about it? The value of our lives would be diminished if we were able to live forever. It would be like winning the lottery and being the last person on Earth. What's the point?
TastyBread1 9 months ago
Give it up ZJ. I CHALLENGE YOU to watch my video and make a RESPONSE! It's OVER! There is nothing to be found in your foul vision other than madness and an insensitivity to the suffering of others in order for YOU to get where you want to get to! Stop this pernicious meme you're spreading I BEG YOU! For the sake of the little boy in my video. If you value logic and reason as you say, stop chasing after fool's gold and accept defeat gracefully. Thank you.
DerivedEnergy 9 months ago
you have a weird way of talking, you sound like you are heavily focused on reading off a script or something, not trying to antagonize, just trying to help.
SpartanDrazen 9 months ago
It might have both......
evo2029 9 months ago
so do you have a penis or a vagina?
DaBossk 9 months ago
I don't mean this in a bad way, but are you gay or a cross dresser or what?
TheSkunky81 10 months ago
@ZJemptv But would lower the Abortion rate hugely Stopping younger people from having children. Even better is the possibility of Artificial Gene mixing The possibility of making Humans with a small amount of Fish RNA allowing them to have double Organs lungs and gills but even then theres the issue of pressure or Ruining a human gene. Even the possibility of making Flying humans Making travel much easier Biologists should center on this not immortality.
yuo252 10 months ago
@ZJemptv immortality wouldn't be good We would be tortured by it. And we need Evolution its a possibility that we evolve into Super humans and the possibility of Biologists will perfect Gene choosing Allowing them to create smarter stronger healthier and longer living humans also getting rid of Disabilities early on sickness and Near perfect immune systems Stopping Aids Cancer and anything else Also we could Fix are genes to make us Mate later in life which would slow down growth slightly But
yuo252 10 months ago
you look pretty in this video!
carlichan21 10 months ago 14
@carlichan21 That's a boy btw
killerflame2 10 months ago
@carlichan21 she looks pretty in every video.
cooldaddyjames2814 3 months ago
No! Dont Ever Wear Red Lipstick Again :-| Nott EVER
candydarling123 10 months ago
The Eternal Life Dilemma
Perfection is not achievable...
I will always seek for It...
I will never be able to reach It...
Thus, I will always have something to accomplish.
Shinjeez 10 months ago
btw im sure an intelligent amount of people would think imortality is stupid anyway. i for one dont want to live forever do u ever stop to wonder what that would even be like? im not saying we cant do it im saying why should we just like your saying why not
MrMeineNamen 11 months ago
@MrMeineNamen You would still be able to commit suicide any time you wanted. Unless you think it would be a bad thing (religion teaches that and says suicide is the "ultimate sin") so why not pursuit immortality and get to live for as long as you want? With immortality we have 2 choices. To live forever (or a LOT) and the choice to die whenever we want but without immortality the only choice is to die (and not when we want) so how does an intelligent amount of people think immortality is stupid?
fablan6 10 months ago
@fablan6 because many REAL scientists believe it would destroy or corrupt the very fabric and purpose of mankind. of course i understand your point it is literally a matter of reality and fiction. this earth and its resources could not handle and care for a huge live whenever they want populace. scientists believe (educatedly) on the theory of natural selection
MrMeineNamen 10 months ago
@MrMeineNamen Corrupt us? More? As for the earth maintaining us that's just a matter of choice. We are stupid that's why earth can't sustain us. Normally, if we weren't so stupid the earth could maintain 10 times our numbers. We use way more than we need. Of course if we all became immortal tomorrow with our stupidity we wouldn't be able to handle it good, but I am talking about immortality in general, let's say after we learned how to dismiss religions and stopped all wars etcetera.
fablan6 10 months ago
@fablan6 religion has nothing to do with it. religion is just a faith in a belief. religious wars? maybe. but no not 10 times our amount. the earth cannot sustain us because of resources, room, ect. immortality is just as probable in success as world peace is... not very likely
MrMeineNamen 10 months ago
@MrMeineNamen If we used our resources in the correct way it would. But if we reached the point were we could make ourselves immortal and even use it (cause if we found it today most probably it would be hidden like so many other inventions that could make our lives better but the rich would lose money etc) then I am sure we would be able of other things as well by then, like inhabiting other planets.
fablan6 10 months ago
its like religion because your bringing it up... again...
MrMeineNamen 11 months ago
It's not that life is so short, it's just that your dead for so long.
Bloddrake 11 months ago
you just make me smile more and more......!!!!
TransSurrealStudios1 11 months ago
1) Before Birth I did not exist (state of death, nonexistence).
2) Now I do.
3) After I die I will return to the state of death / nonexistence.
4) Chance of Birth again somewhere in reality ?
iSOdushman 11 months ago
Comment removed
iSOdushman 11 months ago
Pure consciousness, which is the real self, the real 'I' is timeless & therefore deathless. It is the underlying reality, the unchanging platform from which the non self (intellect, mind, emotions, personality, sensations, gender, sexuality etc) are all observed. Your error is that you have not realised the essential unchanging self. You mistake the self to be part of the phenomenal world, and from this first error, your subsequent idea about death being the end of your existence is a mistake.
bhuridajanah 11 months ago
You've missed a major point here. Have you not considered that the primary reason for humans enjoying their lives in the first place, is because we WILL eventually die. I mean, its what strives human accomplishment and ambition; the fact that we all know that eventually who time will expire. Afterall, if one was immortal, what would give you these motavations if you had eternity to forfill them. 'Too much of a good thing' is an idiom that comes to mind here.
sandmanmk101 11 months ago
@video: living a really long time is undesirable for me because the body becomes so inhibited wit age. mobility slows down, learning slows down, dependance on meds increases, beauty is gone in the obvious ways, ur no longer looked at as a bein with a right 2 a sexuality, etc. there is a point 2 living, helping others, making one's self more positive and others positive/happy. there r 2 many people on the planet as it is and more people living 4ever would increase the burden on the planet
cruelbusiness1984 11 months ago
@GrizzlyBloodclaw some would say that even genetically-identiacal twins r different people wit different personalities. r we nothing more then the sum of our experiences and our genetical make up? this comes 2 the debate of the soul. does it exist and so on.
cruelbusiness1984 11 months ago
@GrizzlyBloodclaw u wouldn't really need cloning to upload the memories. u could hold on2 the disk until the infintile brain is able 2 hold on2 it reliably. the problem is that experience shapes who we r. we aren't the same people @ 50 that we were @ 12. no one stops being shaped by thier experiences till they're dead. there lies the problem. the clone could b put in2 a coma where the body grows and devlops and the brain has no experiences. but is it the same person then? some would cont below:
cruelbusiness1984 11 months ago
These are very excellant thoughts. :)
LiberAnarchy 11 months ago
@GrizzlyBloodclaw
If retainment of memories means immortality, good luck. Memories can still be altered. That is the fallacy of transhumanism, and even humanism. How do you know your memories and thoughts haven't already been altered? That would be equivalent to asking how do you know you haven't already died.
I think DNA is superior and is vastly misunderstood.
SmileyVlog 11 months ago
@GrizzlyBloodclaw
The person would then be dead or digital. Digital is still technically dead.
The moral and ethical dilemmas arrive in this aspect, which the reality is that death can not be escaped, nor should it be.
Personally, I think we most likely already are immortal. We just don't know it, which there is no such thing as death. That is how death is religious, the belief that death is the absolute, the end.
SmileyVlog 11 months ago
And there, abiding quietly, timelessly, purely and eternally, at the back of all words, all thoughts and all intellectualizing is the subjective entity, the observer, the awareness, the pure consciousness, the real self or 'I' (known, by some as the soul, the atma, a 'particle of God'). It cannot be realized by means of words, thoughts and intellectualizing. Too much Intellectualism is anathema to the mystic for it leads consciousness outward, away from truth and into the maze of speculation.
bhuridajanah 11 months ago
@bhuridajanah I disagree. intellectualism has brought sanity 2 the debate of religion, morals, and bringing people 2 realize slavery is wrong and all people r equal
cruelbusiness1984 11 months ago
@cruelbusiness1984 Im not saying it hasn't. I'm saying the more the real self (pure consciousness) gets drawn out into non self (intellectualism, mind, body) then the harder it is to realise the truth of who you are. Meditation is the method realised as best for self realisation, intellectualism is fine for many worldly things, as you rightly say. But intellectualism is not given as the method for attaining self realisation. You have to use the appropriate method if you want the right result.
bhuridajanah 11 months ago
Consciousness is timeless and therefore immortal anyway. What's the big deal?
bhuridajanah 11 months ago
@dmgirl3000 I know the problem isn't tech itself - tech is a good thing. Its just people always seem too stupid to implement our tech intelligently. I'll see if I can find that book; thanks ;)
Revellica 11 months ago
All gender benders hate God.
tonee127 1 year ago
@tonee127
All people who claim things hate god are speaking without knowledge of the state of reality or the mindset of whom they are talking about.
dmgirl3000 11 months ago
@dmgirl3000 That's simply not true in my case, and I already know way more than I want to about this freaks mindset.
tonee127 11 months ago
@tonee127
You know more than you want to know to formulate an opinion, but not enough of what you need to know to critique their opinions. Also, freak is never the proper term to refer to anyone. You may be bigoted, but I don't call you a freak for it.
Maybe you should go crawl into a little corner of isolation if you are so afraid of viewpoints other than your own. Lord knows we don't need another closed minded fool bogging down intelligent conversation.
dmgirl3000 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tonee127 "All gender benders hate God."
Dude! That is uncool and a totally pointless comment! No need to be bashing on people just for bashing sake. Don't be a hater!
Revellica 11 months ago
you would probably still age and remain living. If it is a forever young sort of thing then that would be awesome. Then again if we continue multiplying and people would be forced to die eventually and most defiantly in certain situations.
imnotthisoldlol 1 year ago
@imnotthisoldlol
Telomerase inhibitor is working on the aging issue.
Also, eventually we're going to have to limit births anyways.
dmgirl3000 11 months ago
I don't thank sceince for making reproduction possible for sterile people. They should adopt one of the thousands of children that need a home instead. I could only condone searching for immortality once we have found an equilibrium with our world.
Revellica 1 year ago
I believe the largest problem we have with the science we currently use is our failure for long-term thought. We go ahead and start pumping things out for mass use before we are aware of the side-effects so yes - I do believe that you should not impliment a technology until it has been thorougly gone over and all possible sceineros accounted for with answers to possible problems. cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
@Revellica
Actually, scientists do this. the issue is that there are people who do not look into science and learn.
What you are referring to is actually covered in Carl Sagan's "A Demon Haunted World"
The issue isn't with technology, it is with the ignorant masses who refuse to learn.
dmgirl3000 11 months ago
The idea that we could all live longer without it taking anything away from others is horseshit. As it is, many people in the world are suffering so that Americans can have the quality of life that we do. In order for what your saying to be acheived the human population would need to be MUCH smaller. People do need to limit the amount of children they have - like it or not. Its called responsiblity - it makes me angry that people are so short-sighted and selfish on this topic. cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
I have a serious problem with the fact that our planet is being utterly destroyed, but the rich would rather invest their money in immortatliy for themselves. It makes me want to smash their labs and use the money to feed the poor, provide funds for abortions and grow organic farms. Our strain on the Earth is something that we have to fix in THIS generation - period. cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
Things are meant to die. The belief that we are better than nature (which is highly stressed in religions) is why the Earth and all the organisms in it are suffering. Our lives require the constant consumption of other life forms. The only way to extend life and not risk running out of resources for everyone is to start policing births - do you want to do that? (I have wanted to for years but that's besides point). cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
There is no solution to death. Carl Sagen said: "The keys to evolution are time and death". In other words, we need to get out of the way. We are meant to die just like everything else in the universe. The statement: "We are not obligated to ensure evolution continues" is one of the most selfish and self-absorbed things I've ever heard. cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
The reason for our current overpopulation is the result of people living much longer than we used to. This has resulted in a much higher strain on our Earth. Wanting to avoid death is not just like religion; however it is a major reason that religion was dreamed up - in other words it is coming from the same place of fear or inability to let go. cont...
Revellica 1 year ago
We probably could have found the secret to immortality a long time ago. The dark ages didn't help at all. But then ago. who knows??
funnyguy1321 1 year ago
Is this lady a vegan? If so, awesome. If not, she should be.
Thestralsxxx 1 year ago
It is true that we don't have all the answers, but I don't think our bodies are biologically equipped to sustain our lives infinitely. That's just not how life seems to work. Rather, it seems to be in line with the old cliche "circle of life" concept. Sure, we can increase our average life spans and hopefully quality of living, but in all honesty, the difference between that and infinity is the difference between throwing a bullet and shooting it. We don't even understand infinity that well.
pumarunner88 1 year ago
They're slowly making it possible to live forever, but you have to be an embryo to have it. I forgot exactly what they strengthen, but it's something in the cells, which makes the newer cells stronger. So you'll stay at your prime state (around 21 years of age) for around 400 years, unless something (i.e. a bus hitting you) intervenes.
jjuggaloparkour 1 year ago
If I could choose to live for 100 years longer, then I probably will, then I would probably take up that offer. But I would never want to live forever. I don't know. It's just something inside me that screams, "NO! THAT'S NOT RIGHT!"
AlphabetSoupCircus 1 year ago
The really interesting aspect of near immortality or merely very long lives, is the social and economic changes it would necessitate. People would not be satisfied with flipping burgers for 10,000 years. On the other hand, not everyone is resourceful enough to find something interesting to do even if there were unlimited resources and opportunities. Legalised and assisted suicide would probably become a social necessity (Which would take care of overpopulation).
verywierd6767 1 year ago
PART VII (summary...promise)
So, I don't argue that immortality in some absolute sense (as we'd need to define it) is unethical. Change is inevitable. And to persist as a species at all (individually or collectively), the ability to adapt to this change is commensurately indispensable. The only unethical act is to move forward with radical life extension without considering the reasons nature has so overwhelming and deeply selected for this curious trait called "death".
jabiv25 1 year ago
PART VI (I lied...this is last one)
Where was I? Oh yes, the pot must be stirred occasionally (and paradoxically) to maintain relevance to dynamic environment, increase cultural order (e.g. hunter/gather, agriculture, monarchy, democracy, ad infinitum), and generally put more adaptable potential in the bank.
In a sense we are immortal as long as our species remains on this planet. Without nature's innovation of death, we need to replace it with a similar means to persist and adapt.
jabiv25 1 year ago
PART V (LAST)
An immortal population that cohered a couple hundred years ago would need some way to do what nature has already selected for; namely, introduce intermittent disorder necessary to maintain vital diversity and capacity for adaptability. Here in lies the paradox of life: continued levels of order actually require a measure of inherent disorder to maintain the capacity for potential for integration. The pot must be stirred every now and again to increase in order, maintain...
jabiv25 1 year ago
PART IV
Immortality at our current state of evolution is problematic because our brains go through a definitive cycle of more to less plasticity over a lifetime. This cycle has co-evolve with the cycle of life and death. To reach a state of minimum plasticity, and then preserving it in perpetuity, is to tend towards over-coherence as a species. The likely result is a lack of diversity as the species over-coheres on ideas that solidified in an increasingly irrelevant environment...
jabiv25 1 year ago
PART III
Ok, I should really do a video response...
I, of course, haven't argued yet that immortality, if it is possible, is intrinsically unethical. I will make that case.
Persistence of any form, e.g. life, is predicated on a balance between saliency (or distinctness of form) and the simultaneous integration of that form with its surroundings. This balance creates a tension between over-coherence, i.e. the tendency to cohere on oneself, and under-coherence, i.e. the opposite...
jabiv25 1 year ago
PART II
If one is not concerned about the longevity of our lineage then I would argue that they are selfish, because species survival is very rare. Life is sparse in the universe, in general, and to not consider the implication of such a radical departure from what has served survival for the vast majority of persistent lineages is not an adaptive trait; and in its solipsism, I respectfully argue that such disregard is unethical...
jabiv25 1 year ago
Nature selected for death of the individual for a reason. There are species on this planet that live forever in the sense that their adaptation to the changing environment is more continuous than that of the vast majority of plants and animals like ourselves. But as we have and will continue to lengthen our lives (a forgone conclusion), we must beg the question of why nature has selected for intermittent death if we are interested in the longevity of our lineage...
jabiv25 1 year ago
WTH IS UP WITH UR FREKING VOICE
TJBwestlake 1 year ago
@whosyodaddyyy I think it's a girl?
Elemental135 1 year ago
wait, is this a guy?
whosyodaddyyy 1 year ago
overpopulation would be a big problem, but it would still be nice to be able to decide when you die, especially when you work at something.Some expert cancer researchers that live a hundred years longer could make far more progress than new researchers who have to learn all this progress from scratch and start over again.
FierceRodents 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Don't let this sick fuck around little boys!
atheistdestroyer1 1 year ago
There is the overpop issue.
odenskrigare 1 year ago
Immortality needs to be held off until we start infesting other planets. We need to be able to keep having children to continue improving the species, and stuck on this one rock we can't live for crazy long time periods. Especially with those annoying people with 5 kids in 5 years. give them 500 years and they will have a few hundred mouth breathers yelling in the grocery stores
FrogShaman 1 year ago
People are meant to die. The planet wouldn't be able to support humans if everyone was living forever.
bushido44J 1 year ago
Immortality is a fact of life which already exists, science is just beginning to become aware of the existence of our spiritual essence which is the real entity. This physical existence is merely a projection of our consciousness which is the ONLY thing that's real. Don't mistake this with the bullshit the churches peddle, ingest a "heroic" dose of LSD and you'll understand what I mean.
felixq78 1 year ago
@ZJemptv The last point is the main reason I would be against immortality.Over population would definitely be the result at this stage of our development.There could be two answers to this 1)You only give the gift of immortality to those of great accomplishment.Like a scientist whose theory had revolutionized our world or something or 2) You hold off on dispensing it until humans are space faring.Either way can't see it in my lifetime.
gamesmaster35 1 year ago
You inspire me to continue the persuit of immortality! thanks for set of clear and logical statements - this video is worth broadcasting to everyone.
mezcestro 1 year ago
It would be very exiting to study the psychological effects of living 300 years. Could you reatch the limit of your long term memory? Will you aquire more and more bugs in your mental system? How far could you push it?
Personally I don't want to live forever, and i cant rely offer a good reason for it. It feels kinda like having your cake and eating it too. I guess death kinda loses it's sting after a few hundred years.
TheSlyngel 1 year ago
....@_@...:&...@_@...
MyHAL2010 1 year ago
There is no reason to have to limit birthrates. There is plenty of space on the earth for mankind,even trillions can live here.The problem isn't space it's food.we would have to convert the ocean into a big algae farm for food.orgrow it in greenhouses on the moon or underground.once the launch to space cost go down far enough it wont matter.population pressure has always been a driving force for expansion.given a mass ground to orbit transprt system(ei elevato)people who dont like it will leave.
Felhaven 1 year ago
We're going to have to start restricting birthrates within the next 100 years anyway, or we will all run out of food. Great video ZJ, points well made.
Anon12356 1 year ago
As a friend of mine once said to me, we are born to die...and the end is nothing to fear...
garydupuis 1 year ago
@garydupuis
We weren't born to die. We were just born. Does life really make more sense if tagged with some meaning?
I can still have fun, be social, pursue an education and a job thinking life has no aim whatsoever.
I don't recall anyone being able to utilize prescribing a meaning to life to create, examine or use/experience something.
Unbeginner 1 year ago
i wonder if immortality is going to be available in our life times
gamepro94z 1 year ago
You always look so damn HOT.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
Having longer lifespans, is certainly something I think we should strive for, I'm in total agreement with Zinnia on that one.
And in so much as immortality is currently impossible, so what we are looking as, is so far just the possibility of having longer life-spans; while it would increase some problems with over-population, I think it might also bring the already big problem of over-population, to the forefront of our 'to do list'.
Perhaps allowing us serious consideration of solutions.
PurpleGhost 1 year ago
I wish you knew what I know. You can not see the kingdom of God unless you seek it. The further you are from God the less you will know him because your heart will become harden by the world. Matter can not be made, but we are all made of matter so what is matter?
GodsWill777777 1 year ago
@GodsWill777777
I don't understand what matter is and how it came to be = goddidit. And how does talking about matter prove anything about the existence of your god?
alexanderalexandrou 1 year ago
@GodsWill777777 Matter is God. God is the Universe. When we die we really do die and the chemical bonds that give us rise are broken.
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@Luigi84289 Now what about our life force energy? It must go somewhere. Do you you know where?
GodsWill777777 1 year ago
@GodsWill777777 What is life force energy?
Luigi84289 1 year ago
@Luigi84289 I think he means "soul"
madjimms 1 year ago
@madjimms What is a "soul?"
Anonpeace 1 year ago
@Anonpeace Not really sure, I think it involves some religious bull. :-)
madjimms 1 year ago
@Luigi84289 It is the electrical energy that runs you body. The impulses that that effect your neurons in your body that make you live and move.
GodsWill777777 1 year ago
@GodsWill777777 The electrical energy is just moving electrons.
Luigi84289 1 year ago