More
5

By the time children today are old enough to die from natural causes, we'll have a cure for that.

At some point I think we will 'cure' cellular senescence. Then humans can stay physically in their prime, indefinitely. But there are other limits, like memory. Because memories require physical space, there is only room for a limited amount.
I think we can get past that either naturally, by overwriting old memories, or artificially, by augmenting memory with technology. Research is already looking at brain augmentation with electronics.

So what will be the ultimate limit? Or will humans achieve immortality?
By the time children today are old enough to die from natural causes, we'll have a cure for that. At some point I think we will 'cure' cellular senescence. Then humans can stay physically in their prime, indefinitely. But there are other limits, like memory. Because memories require physical space, there is only room for a limited amount. I think we can get past that either naturally, by overwriting old memories, or artificially, by augmenting memory with technology. Research is already looking at brain augmentation with electronics. So what will be the ultimate limit? Or will humans achieve immortality?

24 comments

[–] InnocentBystander [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

Yes, at least for a natural life.

We're long past 'natural' lifespans. I am specifically talking about artificially extended lives and the coming technology.

All cells in the human body are programmed to die ..

"At some point I think we will 'cure' cellular senescence."

In reality there are numerous ..

Everything you listed is at least partially treatable already. I am optimistic about future medicine.

Free-radical theory takes a focused look at one aspect of aging. I was taken with the idea when it was first popularized. It is interesting.
But it doesn't really apply here. The damage can be repaired, in theory. I don't think future-tec will consider free-radical damage to be an obstacle.
[–] Sarcastaway 1 points (+1|-0)

We're long past 'natural' lifespans.

I'll give you that, but I think gene modification is crossing into a different realm. Can you really be called human if you have different DNA? Or perhaps its a process of rewriting the code from your original "good DNA" over your current damaged DNA with a series of tailored retroviruses? Not sure that possible, since one persons blood/fluids would probably do some serious harm to anyone else.

Regardless, if we can give cells indefinite lifespans, we can give people indefinite lifespans. No question about it. Humans are machines. If you replace the parts that fail, the machine keeps working. This raises the same questions found in Theseus's paradox. If you keep replacing parts until there's no original parts left, is it still the same machine? Or have you just made a new machine?

Physically, yes, the human body can be sustained indefinitely. But the immortality of the human mind is a question for philosophers.
[–] InnocentBystander [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

I think gene modification is crossing into a different realm. Can you really be called human if you have different DNA?

The lines get so blurred that it's difficult to use some terms. The difference between treating a simple injury or sickness and doing a head transplant is only a difference of degree. At some point there is a line that gets crossed, but I'm not sure there's an objective way to locate that line.
I'm also not sure it really matters.
Nature has been removed from the equation, and morality is subjective and malleable.

But the immortality of the human mind is a question for philosophers.

For today, I appoint us as official Philosophers then.
I would love to know what a thousand year old person thinks about. I have doubt the mind could cope with that amount of experience without some form of augmentation. More than just running out of room for new memories, I think other aspects of 'thinking' would grow beyond the infrastructures ability to work with it.

So I guess I think that if we stay 100% organic, our brains will begin to malfunction and turn to mush. So no immortality, except as a retard or vegetable.
But Cyber-human 2.0 could be the next dominant lifeform on the planet, and it could potentially live forever.
[–] Sarcastaway 1 points (+1|-0)

I would love to know what a thousand year old person thinks about.

Obviously I can only guess, but based on my own experience of getting older, I tend to find myself living in the moment more. I would imagine anyone that can survive being in their own skin for 1000 years is probably going to be pretty zen. Probably not going to be very emotionally reactive. Not necessarily jaded, but cool in a "I've seen some shit, and this ain't shit" sort of way.

I have doubt the mind could cope with that amount of experience without some form of augmentation.

If someone is augmented, I assume memory recall, and extra processing power would be used. In this situation, its not a stretch to think people would all be connected. With enough processing power to sift through the "internet of minds," I think every person would trend toward the same personality. I mean, if 99.999% of your knowledge and experiences are the same as everyone else, genetic factors would be the only unique part of your personality. I think this scenario would mean the death of the ego. In a word: boring. Lots of assumptions in that conclusion though.

So I guess I think that if we stay 100% organic, our brains will begin to malfunction and turn to mush. So no immortality, except as a retard or vegetable.

Psychological trauma would probably accumulate, and impair function. I don't think there's a real neurological problem with information storage, or types of thinking though. Because such a person would just forget things as they learned new things, they'd probably forget just about everything about their original self after enough time. That might look something like amnesia, just very high-functioning. Insanity and suicide would probably be more common that not in either case.

Which leads to me to wonder about mortality statistics. Assuming there are no backups/copies of yourself to respawn into, I wonder if accidents, murder, or suicide would be the new leading cause of death in that world?
©2016-2022 Phuks LLC. All Rights Reserved.
ToS | Privacy | Changelog | Canary | Donate | Bugs | License
Served by c7693d2284ae