Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8139816.stm

As time goes by, its undeniably noticeable that we are getting much closer to a man-made fountain of youth.

Masking the research with the face of "life extension", would it actually be a good thing that one day man will never age at all, hence not dying at all?
In terms of research and sciences, it might be the most significant ever, but socially and environmentally, is it?

Unless of course till then, man had found a way to actually step into the world of 'after-death' and see what's in there, then we might have another thought of actually living forever.

Even if say there are nothing after death, then we seriously need the technology to either help us migrate to all sorts of places in the Universe, or just simply shrink us to ants size just to make more space here on Earth.

In my opinion, the essence of life is in the soul, once the shell is gone, it cannot be brought back to life. and that is why even with cloning, the cloned product no longer shares behaviorial traits of its clone, maybe just the physical aspects

This post has been edited by beatlesalbum: Jul 12 2009, 07:07 PM

firedauz,

Most human beings are INCAPABLE of living happily regardless of their physical environment. So, living longer just prolong the suffering. So, why does it matters??

We NEED to learn how to live first.

Dreamer

if we have immortality, we first need to create/discover more resources and/or stop breeding.

immortality at current scenario is unsustainable.

Nowadays there r many diseases dat hav no cure.So prolong ur life means u suffer longer.
Just my tot

Lol, life extension is nothing more than confining me safely into a prison for life sentence.

Think about that.

Living longer as a form of happiness only applies to a small minority of 6 Billion population we r talking here.

Now, sustaining one human living modern lifestyle - take US for example would need as much as few thousands of dollars to continue for that lifestyle in 1 month. This money in turn is calculated into amount of resources used: Petroleum, Tree, Water, Oxygen, Clothes, Space, Soil, food and yada yada.

So, making humans live longer will definitely bring trouble into the next level as a whole human population are taken into account.

Thus, summary: Living longer doesn't solve anything in the world.

I think immortality will be good in the long run.

In the short run, we will see the problem of overpopulation and dwindling of life-sustaining resources on Earth, but in the long run we will see a tremendous speed increase in the progress of humanity.

Imagine learning physics from an Issac Newton lecture at Multimedia University instead of getting it from a dude who cant teach to save his life, my god that would be fantastic.

Immortality will grant us a continuity of knowledge, we don't need to pick up the pieces from where some great mind left off, we can join them and work with them.

The knowledge of the devastations of war will prevent another from happening, finally giving us lasting and perhaps permanent peace.

It would be awesome for mankind if we didn't die and as I understand it, we're about 30 - 40 years away from it

If your talking about life extension or immortality, whats the difference between this and cyrogenic suspension, where they freeze you and 100 years later you can experience life again as your 200 years old or 100 and change at that time.

at the rate we are going with our mortality condition, the world is already being consumed up by the mere number of 6 billion of people.

and to live any longer would just mean armageddon in a shorter time.

Err, okay. How do you exactly solve the problem at the short run before even thinking about the long run?

And when there's no death, will people still appreciate life itself?

Look at how Michael Jackson being appreciated after HIS DEATH compared when he was still alive!!!

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Jul 13 2009, 03:33 AM

not good, everything will end eventually. nothing is permanent..the world it self will end..it is proven..

earth is full.. so it is not good.. no death mean no giving bac to the earth.. no givin bac mean no nutrient cycle.. no nutrient cycle mean.. no life..
immortality to some maybe good.. but if to all.. it will be disastrous.. jus imagine the numbers of the population keeps on increasing.. wat bout the food supply, wat about the land .. wat about the environment..

Why bother striving so hard in life to achieve material wealth and fame if our lives only last an average of around 70 years.

Being immortal or living a long life like the elves in fantasy literatures actually will give more meaning to our struggle for achievements. Not necessarily a good thing though.

there is this theory that the longer we live, the more immoral/depraved we become. sooner or later we will get bored of whatever stimulus we get and experiment with more and more unhealthy stimulus.

one benefit of this that i can think of is that we can send these immortals to go for space explorations. normal humans will just die along the way since the universe is so big.

another one is like what mentioned by DeniseLau, we can gain continuity of knowledge. imagine if geniuses like einstein or nikola tesla is still alive and continued with their research.

to make it fair i think anybody who is given immortality should be disallowed/disabled to reproduce. that'll help balance things up a bit i think.

But it will still fall into the wrong hand/use,similiar to nobel's dynamite story.
This may prolong those criminal's life and wreak havoc of the world.
Just my tot

This post has been edited by HyourinMaru: Jul 13 2009, 08:12 PM

Its a good thing. Otherwise knowledge will go to a waste.

Err, this supposed to be the Science Lab group, concept of soul not scientifically proven yet.

Nowadays, living is akin to torment. We are just merely some souls tormented day in and day out.

Immortality certainly would not make the cut. I rather choose a quick exit.

Regards, Joey