From: Mike C. (mikec@jax.gulfnet.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 1997 - 23:17:57 MDT
>From: CurtAdams@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 15:54:05 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: Re: Immortality: Avoiding Religious Persecution For Pursuing It.
>
>mikec@jax.gulfnet.com (Mike C.)
>Sender: postmaster@extropy.org
>Reply-to: extropians@extropy.org
>To: cryonet@cryonet.org, Transhuman@logrus.org, Extropians@extropy.org
>
>>Ben Best writes:
>>
>>> I am an ardent life extensionist and atheist, but if someone asked
>>>me if I wanted to be "Immortal", I think I would say "No".
>
>>Not very ardent, how about some dynamic optimism?
>
>Dynamic optimism leading to just wishful thinking is useless (or worse).
If you are dynamicly optimistic
of justice done by wishfull thinking
it is not useless;
it will bring just reward.
> Dynamic optimism is useful only insofar as believing it gets you to do
>things that help you acheive your goals. I should point out that Mr. Best is
>one of the most assiduous (but sensible) practitioners on the calorie
>restriction list, so his actions reflect a dynamic optimism and a real value
>on extended life.
Then let life have value enough not to end it!
>
>>> It is sometimes
>>>hard to remember that FOREVER includes 10exp10exp1000 years from now.
>>>Do I want to be alive in 10exp10exp1000 years?
>
>>I do.
>
>Nobody *knows* what they will want in even 200 years, never mind
>10exp10exp1000 years.
I WILL WANT TO LIVE!
>
> Nobody's ever lived that long.
That can not be proven unless you know all people.
>
> People change over
>time, and we are, after all, only designed to go about 100 years max. Over
>periods longer than the existence of the human race, who knows what you'll
>become?
I do, I will be a living thing.
>
>At some point, you may want to check out.
I may want, but I will not let me die.
>
>I'm quite confident I want a very extended lifespan, but not so arrogant as
>to assume I want to live forever.
So now I'm arrogant for wanting not to die.
>
>I describe my current goal as "500 years
>with an option to extend".
I have had many unused options.
>
>I'll also point out that normal human existance is about 80 years with
>significant deterioration towards the end. There is, as yet, no *proof* that
>we can do better than that.
140 years is better and has been done.
>
>Plausible ideas, yes. Wild speculation, yes.
> But even saying that you will make it to 120 in full possession of your
>faculties is optimistic.
Faculties come and go;
at one point I had no teeth,
and I hope again to not need teeth.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:21 MST