Timeline by Auri Smelser

Is endless life something we should be striving for?

colesmelser1 — 2024-05-30 20:10:36 UTC

The natural cycle of life, perfected in all animals and a natural constant of the world. Should we break this cycle, setting humans down a path of body immortality? A person could still die from a disease or a fatal wound, but what if the "dying of old age" gimmick no longer could happen, and if we could stay safe enough we could possibly live forever. Would the world benefit from a species that can live much longer than any other, and is more advanced and destructive than any other? No longer constrained by the natural cycle of life, Humans would increasingly become destructive, ruining everything which was here already. If humans could stop aging and live forever, the effects on both the globe and society would be devastating.

colesmelser1 — 2024-05-30 20:43:17 UTC

We as a species have always been on a war against death, and we have found the limit for humans with the current medical treatment he has today. The average age of death will continue to increase, but living forever would change everything about the way society functions. Retirement would no longer exist, and more people would be committing suicide than ever, considering they have to work forever. We would stop needing facilities such as old people’s homes, and treatment for these people would slowly fade away while the people without eternal life pass on. Dying based on religion, and dying at a specific age, may become more popular as well, as eternal life is for the gods and not for the mortals. Some may also argue that eternal life is a gift from god, meaning that religion may become more important than ever in some societies. Children would be expected to care much more about their careers, and school would become longer and longer, considering that they no longer need to be rushed into the workforce at such a young age. Death and dying would happen most often by accident, as the only thing that could kill you is health problems or an injury, and grieving would look much different. Murders would become a major issue, as taking away eternal life is a much more severe crime as opposed to only taking 60 years of someone’s life. Prisons would be somewhat useless, either keeping people imprisoned for all eternity or cycling the same people through over and over. To someone living forever, is 80 years in jail really that bad? Death may be a more abrupt event in many people’s lives, and most would never expect their eternal life to be ripped away from a loved one. Having a family and staying with them would be more rare, and many people would have tens or hundreds of kids, so they can have a massive group of eternal living children. I do think that the government would put more effort into safety and making sure people stayed alive as long as possible.

colesmelser1 — 2024-05-30 20:43:29 UTC

One of the biggest problems would be the overpopulation of Earth. If we never had any deaths, and only births, every country would immediately become so overcrowded that there would be massive changes in the way our society works. People would have to start moving to space or the ocean immediately, which would have major effects on the ecosystems. The balance we have now, where the amount of deaths can sometimes match the number of births, is what has kept our world from overflowing with too many humans. Living on Mars and other planets would become a major focus, and new companies would spring up to take people and build cities on the extraterrestrial surface. We may even start living on the moon and taking resources from our asteroid belt, if there’s too many people living on Mars taking all of the raw earth resources. Our supply of everything, from foods to materials, would be immediately drained, and billions of people would die from hunger and starvation. Killing based on religion, and dying at a specific age, may become more popular as well, as eternal life is for the gods and not for the mortals. Some may also argue that eternal life is a gift from god, meaning that religion may become more important than ever in some societies. We would destroy every ecosystem, every non-food animal would be driven to extinction, and every inch of land on earth would be a home to a human, as we would run out of room otherwise. Cities would start growing upwards as well, and neighborhoods would be destroyed to make huge buildings that can hold tens of thousands of homes. Living on the surface may be seen as a sign of wealth/poorness in this type of society. Global warming would melt the ice caps in no time, and people may even start living underwater. It might be easier to live underwater than in space, so many new inventions would be produced to make living in these environments easier.

colesmelser1 — 2024-05-30 21:15:01 UTC

Endless war would be what Earth is known for, as there is a limiter number of resources, medicine, water, and food. If eternal life wasn’t something that was given to all humans, war would immediately occur, and it would be a total free-for-all for the eternal life pill. Every person in power would want it and would want their country to have it. It doesn’t matter if it was an extremely expensive treatment only available for the 1%, people would absolutely kill each other in order to live forever. Most people fear death and would do anything for it. Humans would be the only living creature on the planet, besides the billions of animals we would need for food purposes, but at that point it may be more efficient to “grow” the meat, which is in research as of now. I would hate to see all the fish die but because the ocean would become so filled with trash and warm, all fish would likely die. The microplastics in our food would be more abundant than ever, and the illnesses would be horrible. I feel that people would do their best to create a super-virus to whittle down the number of living humans by a gargantuan amount, which would work excellently as so many people would be bunched up together. Making a disease that kills fast and spreads far would work excellently in this type of society. Hospitals would become skyscrapers built for treating people’s illnesses, and injuries instead of helping people into their last stages of life. Most people would die too fast for loved ones to say goodbye with eternal life, as only something extremely dangerous would be able to kill you. Government would need to change as well, with mandatory year requirements for any position. There should be a fifty to a hundred year max on serving in office, as it would be bad if the same people stayed in power forever. Pets would likely be a thing of the past, either being replaced with robotic counterparts or just forgotten about, as the longest living pets could only live to around one-hundred and fifty years old maximum. Many people would revolt as well, as living forever under an awful government wouldn’t slide for most people, and they would try to overtake and control their governments because they want to live better lives. The best option in my opinion would either be to live on a spacecraft or live on Mars. Slowly we would evolve better bodies to live on the Martian surface, and the abundant room on the planet means it would be unpopulated for many years. Living forever makes everything about being alive as hellish as possible, and we would likely all have to fight for our lives anyways, as the planet would be dying.

colesmelser1 — 2024-05-30 21:20:18 UTC

Eternal life is a popular and enjoyable thought to ponder upon, but when it’s given to every human, way too many complications arise. Death and dying makes us human and it makes us alive. We are simply robots without death, and the feeling we feel would slowly disappear the longer we stay alive. Connecting with someone and staying by their side until death does you apart is a joy of life, and to me it is my personal greatest human experience. There’s nothing I want more than to grow old with my partner and move on from this world alongside him. Living forever would have more negative effects on society and the planet than if we only lived until fifty years old. Theoretically speaking it would be interesting to have one person who lives forever and then doing research on them so that our pets can live very long lives, but when it’s every human living forever, I think I would rather just die at the normal human time. We don’t need to be striving for eternal life, and the way society has progressed so far, we won’t discover the secret for many years. Improving medicine and keeping people alive and happy as long as possible until they die should be our goal as a society, as every human wants to die in a painless, and peaceful manner. Feeling the emotions of grief and loss is a major part of what makes us human, and if we live forever and no longer experience loss, are we naught but simple robots, repeating the same day for eternity?