Tuesday, May 5, 2009 | Reason : Commentary | print version

Print | Comments |

Go gentle into that good night

by Roger Ebert - Chicago SunTimes

Reposted from
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/05/go_gently_into_that_good_night.html

blank

I know it is coming, and I do not fear it, because I believe there is nothing on the other side of death to fear. I hope to be spared as much pain as possible on the approach path. I was perfectly content before I was born, and I think of death as the same state. What I am grateful for is the gift of intelligence, and for life, love, wonder, and laughter. You can't say it wasn't interesting. My lifetime's memories are what I have brought home from the trip. I will require them for eternity no more than that little souvenir of the Eiffel Tower I brought home from Paris.

I don't expect to die anytime soon. But it could happen this moment, while I am writing. I was talking the other day with Jim Toback, a friend of 35 years, and the conversation turned to our deaths, as it always does. "Ask someone how they feel about death," he said, "and they'll tell you everyone's gonna die. Ask them, In the next 30 seconds? No, no, no, that's not gonna happen. How about this afternoon? No. What you're really asking them to admit is, Oh my God, I don't really exist and I might be gone at any given second."

Me too, but I hope not. I have plans. Still, this blog has led me resolutely toward the contemplation of death. In the beginning I found myself drawn toward writing about my life. Everyone's life story is awaiting only the final page. Then I began writing on the subject of evolution, that most consoling of all the sciences, and was engulfed in an unforeseen discussion about God, the afterlife, and religion.

When I began this blog I thought if there was one thing I'd never write about, it would be religion. But you, my readers, have wanted to write about it. In thousands of messages. Half a million words. Life, science, belief, gods, evolution, intelligent design, the afterlife, reincarnation, the nature of reality, what came before the Big Bang, what waits after final entropy, the nature of intelligence, the reality of the self, death, death, death. This dialog still continues. The thread beneath the evolution entry, posted Dec. 3, has drawn nearly 1,900 comments, some of them longer than the entry, and it is still active. How did I find a group of readers with so many metaphysicians?

This has been an education for me. No one will read all the comments except me, but if you did, you could learn all a layman should be expected to understand about the quantum level. You would discover a defender of Intelligent Design so articulate that when he was away for a couple of days, the Darwinians began to fret and miss him. You would have the mathematical theory of infinity explained so that, while you will still be unable to conceive of infinity, you will understand the thinking involved.
...
Click below to continue reading
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/05/go_gently_into_that_good_night.html

Posted: Tuesday, May 5, 2009 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 155 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #373313 by HandyGeek on May 5, 2009 at 1:54 pm

Wow, I'm going to spread this around for sure.

Other Comments by HandyGeek

2. Comment #373316 by Estragon on May 5, 2009 at 2:04 pm

Ebert: right about death and most other movies.

Other Comments by Estragon

3. Comment #373318 by Lucas on May 5, 2009 at 2:06 pm

What if everything...just happened?

Indeed, Roger. (Too bad I couldn't keep the italics he used. The emphasis was key.) Or maybe we should say, "What if everything is just happening?" Always has been, always will. No end, no beginning. Just eternal rearrangement. Order, entropy, order, entropy, etc.

Really nice article. A very healthy attitude toward death. I hope when he does die that this essay gets plastered all over the place.

Other Comments by Lucas

4. Comment #373325 by Stafford Gordon on May 5, 2009 at 2:24 pm

I am in and of the
Universe!
but,
what is the
Universe?
No one yet,
knows.

My pretentiuos contribution to a fascinating article; that has a title with a Dillan Thomas twang.

Have another glass of wine Stafford.

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

5. Comment #373329 by Ascaphus on May 5, 2009 at 2:36 pm

I look forward to claims that he recanted in his final moments...

Matt

Other Comments by Ascaphus

6. Comment #373334 by Colwyn Abernathy on May 5, 2009 at 2:47 pm

"Stuff just happens, what the hell?"
-Terry Pratchett

Well written, Roger. Will miss you. Thanks for all the opinions, even the ones that I totally disagree with.

Other Comments by Colwyn Abernathy

7. Comment #373335 by Steve Zara on May 5, 2009 at 2:49 pm

I think this is a sad article, and I dislike his attitude. He seems to encourage a passivity towards death. I certainly don't want to be sped to death by disease. I want to go there on foot, taking each step reluctantly.

We should not go gently into that good night. We should fight as much as possible while keeping our dignity. The universe is not the same after our deaths as before our births. Perhaps of the most wonderful and strangest things we know of have appeared - human minds. It should be a source of deep regret any time any mind is lost. There is so much that is unique to each person, so much that will be lost in time.

That is not to say we should fear death, or that we should avoid it when suffering is unbearable. But let's not develop Stockholm Syndrome when faced with the fatal hostage-taker called the Grim Reaper. Let's work to avoid his captivity as long as is possible for each of us, and for all humanity.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

8. Comment #373337 by Bonzai on May 5, 2009 at 2:55 pm

Steve

Ranked as excellent. Well put.

Other Comments by Bonzai

9. Comment #373338 by Gregg Townsend on May 5, 2009 at 3:03 pm

Some of this article was nice to read but I don't care for the weepy, fatalistic, sentimental tone. Where's the fight, the drive, the passion and vigor. Even his statement that unconditional love is the only love worth having seemed a bit sad. I know tone is hard to convey with words but sheesh...you're alive.

Cheer up.

--edit--

Please read Steve's post above. He beat me to the punch with better skill such as:

But let's not develop Stockholm Syndrome when faced with the fatal hostage-taker called the Grim Reaper.

I also ranked his post as excellent!

Other Comments by Gregg Townsend

10. Comment #373339 by nalfeshnee on May 5, 2009 at 3:18 pm

Oh my God, I don't really exist and I might be gone at any given second.

That's kind of the panic attack I get occasionally.

But it still doesn't stop me from wasting my time on rubbish. Once an evolved monkey, always an evolved monkey.

Anyway, I've concluded that reality is just one big program running on one heck of a simulator and before my sub-program gets mothballed I'd love a chance to find out who switched all this on...

Ironically, Matrix-wise, it was probably us in the first place.

Other Comments by nalfeshnee

11. Comment #373340 by mbannonb on May 5, 2009 at 3:19 pm

Having grown up with him, watching Siskel and Ebert way back when and loving it, and now reading this, I feel like he is a real kindred spirit.

I will miss him.

Other Comments by mbannonb

12. Comment #373341 by Bonzai on May 5, 2009 at 3:20 pm

Does he get terminal cancer or something?

Other Comments by Bonzai

13. Comment #373342 by Sally Luxmoore on May 5, 2009 at 3:26 pm

The quiz was quite fun. Have a go!

Top = secular humanism 100%
Bottom = Jehovah's Witness 7%. (What on earth was even 7% of me doing agreeing with them? Don't know which question that was...)

Generally 'none of the above' or 'not applicable' seems to cover it....

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

14. Comment #373343 by Nova on May 5, 2009 at 3:26 pm

The article seems rational at first so why does he add this in?

Do I believe her? Absolutely. I believe her literally--not symbolically, figuratively or spiritually. I believe she was actually aware of my call, and that she sensed my heartbeat. I believe she did it in the real, physical world I have described, the one I live in with my wristwatch. I see no reason why such communication could not take place. I'm not talking about telepathy, psychic phenomenon or a miracle. The only miracle is that she was there when it happened, as she was for many long days and nights. I'm talking about her standing there and knowing something. Haven't many of us experienced that? Come on, haven't you? I admire Skeptic magazine, but I'm not interested in their explanation or debunking of this event. What goes on happens at a level not accessible to scientists, theologians, mystics, physicists, philosophers or psychiatrists. It's a human kind of a thing.

I think I sense some postmodernism here, surely he must realize that something affecting things literally in the world of the wristwatch will have measurable effects and thus is accessible to science? He seems to try to escape this contradiction with the empty word that it;s on a different "level" but the fact is that his wife acknowledged feeling a connection to him, so it affected her thoughts which affect her behaviour, which could change a lot of very real, measurable variables. It's odd he excludes theologians and psychics from his level because they would use similar terminology to argue the same thing, and that they have access to it. Other than that, I agree with Steve that it seems sad. I think that fits with the general mood of the article. It's like rather than making any point or having a discussion he seems like he is just getting stuff off his chest... maybe that also explains why in amongst all his sense he has this "level", hand waves away skeptical analysis but claims it is still somehow beyond the discourse of psychics and theologians.

EDIT Correcting typo in closing italic, clumsy me

Other Comments by Nova

15. Comment #373344 by Gregg Townsend on May 5, 2009 at 3:27 pm

Speaking of the Grim Reaper; has anyone read The Book Thief? I seriously loved that book (I read it on my wife's Kindle). I went to Barnes and Noble to pick up a hard copy for our library when I noticed that it can only be found in the youth fiction section...

What does that say about me?!

--edit--Nova, I think you have a run-away Italic tag.
--edit 2-- Nevermind.

Other Comments by Gregg Townsend

16. Comment #373347 by TalentedChimp on May 5, 2009 at 3:35 pm

How sad if our freedom to think about the immensity of time and space could be defined by what someone informs us that we believe.

Beautiful.

Other Comments by TalentedChimp

17. Comment #373353 by Steve Zara on May 5, 2009 at 3:51 pm

Comment #373339 by nalfeshnee

Oh my God, I don't really exist and I might be gone at any given second.

That's kind of the panic attack I get occasionally.

I find I have that less as my understanding of science has grown. The natural world is, at the core, very simple and extremely symmetrical. In a way, it is barely there. It is very stable.

Now, some theologians think that the universe has to be sustained instant-by-instant by God. If God did not work at it, everything would vanish immediately.

But, reality looks very much like nothing is working to sustain anything. It is mostly empty, mostly dark, mostly nearly as cold as it is possible to be, and slowly falling apart.

I find that comforting. I prefer not continuing to exist merely at the whim of a deity.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

18. Comment #373357 by Frankus1122 on May 5, 2009 at 4:03 pm

14. Comment #373343 by Nova

Yes, that part bothered me too. He seems to want to believe that there is something more going on when there is a strongly held belief or emotion at work.

Oh well, one of his multitudes is wrong.
No biggie.

I am not sure he is encouraging passivity. He says he hopes to live awhile longer because he has plans. However, he is merely commenting on the inevitability of death and has concluded it is what it is. He will die. Some of his ideas will live on for a time and then, they too will be gone.

The death by disease thing is not for me. I want to be alive as long as possible. I also am a reluctant walker towards death. No, I don't like that either. I just want to walk. Death will find me when it does. I'm certainly not going towards it consciously.
Nor do I want to think about it any more.
Bye.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

19. Comment #373379 by zeroangel on May 5, 2009 at 4:40 pm

Well, though I know that there is nothing to "fear," it still doesn't mean I'm anxious for death to take me.

At the risk of sounding like a Solipsist; as far as I am concerned, my life is the only one that really matters. Not that I wouldn't risk it for a family member, (especially a child or spouse) I certainly would. However, in the end, it's important to me that I stay alive as long as possible; the universe only "exists" as far as *I* know. After my death; it's kind of a moot point to me.

I am hopeful that, in my lifetime, medicine will unnaturally extend one's life. I guess the weird question is then, how finite is the mental capacities of the human mind and just when would several "normal" lifetimes of memories start to play havoc with one's sanity?

EDIT:

I had a question about quantum mechanics for the physicists here, WRT this:

On the other hand, we have been puzzling over quantum mechanics, which suggests the possibility of instantaneous communication between two entangled particles

I had the impression from some readings recently that entangled particles aren't so much "communicating" (as that would violate causality) but were set in that fashion from the point they were "entangled" and that there is some unexplained mechanism that makes "entangled" particles "mirrors" of one another.

I also read something about entangled particles being the same particle and just one traveling backward in time. That was pretty kewl stuff.

Is any of this accurate or am I missing something?

Other Comments by zeroangel

20. Comment #373383 by JD Cherry on May 5, 2009 at 4:50 pm

I can't ever come to terms with the fact that I'm going to cease to exist. It definitely fills me with dread, and I think that anyone who says that they are ok with it is in some kind of denial. In the end I agree with the philosopher Tom Nagel that the best we can do is appreciate the absurdity of it all and live life with a sense of irony rather than tragedy or heroism.

Other Comments by JD Cherry

21. Comment #373391 by a.j.g.wolf on May 5, 2009 at 5:13 pm

Like it said on the buses...

"Stop worrying and enjoy LIFE."

Other Comments by a.j.g.wolf

22. Comment #373395 by Sally Luxmoore on May 5, 2009 at 5:17 pm

As Woody Allen said,

- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work,
I want to achieve immortality through not dying.

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

23. Comment #373398 by bluebird on May 5, 2009 at 5:25 pm

I miss Siskel & Ebert's intelligent, congenial repartee...

Thanks for posting his blog.

Other Comments by bluebird

24. Comment #373407 by serotonin_wraith on May 5, 2009 at 5:38 pm

JD Cherry,

How can you be worried about something you'll have no awareness of?

Other Comments by serotonin_wraith

25. Comment #373410 by zeroangel on May 5, 2009 at 5:42 pm

serotonin_wraith:

I think it's the whole idea of not having any awareness at all that is unnerving to us; a kind of "higher-brow" more conscious reflection of a "self-preservation" instinct.

It's "hard-wired." I fear death in the same way I fear heights; even if I know I am standing in a tall building and looking out a sturdy window. I fear death in the same way I enjoy food. It just "is."

Other Comments by zeroangel

26. Comment #373412 by serotonin_wraith on May 5, 2009 at 5:49 pm

I see it from the other side. As it required a continuous chain of life lasting billions of years just for me to be here, I feel extremely lucky to get about 80 years (hopefully). How many years should we get before we feel more comfortable with not existing? 500? 1000? Forever? Compared to other animals we seem to get one of the longest lifespans. It's not denial for me, just a different outlook.

Other Comments by serotonin_wraith

27. Comment #373414 by zeroangel on May 5, 2009 at 5:52 pm

serotonin_wraith:

We probably think very nearly alike. As I indicated in the previous post, I think the human mind must be limited in some fashion and that biologal "immortality" (achieved via medicine) would eventually lead to some kind of insanity or memory loss of some kind.

In the end, I think it’s kind of pointless to worry about. Comment #373391 by a.j.g.wolf is dead on.

Other Comments by zeroangel

28. Comment #373416 by Sally Luxmoore on May 5, 2009 at 5:55 pm

For me, I really have no problem with the same non-existence that we all 'had' before we were born.
However, I do occasionally get annoyed that there won't be a moment for all the religious types when they think 'hey, there's nothing here!'
Most of all, I would really like there to be a hell for just a few of the most awful people. Sometimes you actually do want retribution and punishment!

There I go, showing my tender liberal side again...

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

29. Comment #373427 by a.j.g.wolf on May 5, 2009 at 6:14 pm

Sally Luxmoore said:

However, I do occasionally get annoyed that there won't be a moment for all the religious types when they think 'hey, there's nothing here!'

We won't have that moment either. That's why we think it in advance.

Most of all, I would really like there to be a hell for just a few of the most awful people. Sometimes you actually do want retribution and punishment!

So you logically will have to start meting out justice here and now... And don't forget to applaud and reward a few of the least awful people, for there's no heaven either.

Edit: changed "now" to "in advance".

Other Comments by a.j.g.wolf

30. Comment #373430 by Frankus1122 on May 5, 2009 at 6:19 pm

There is the idea that religious belief or a belief in the supernatural developed as a response to our self-consciousness and awareness of death.

I haven't totally wrapped my head around the idea but it goes something along the lines of this:

We are aware of ourselves as conscious beings.
A lot of what we do is to relieve anxiety about the future. (We plant crops and make medicines and build bridges in order to make our future lives more comfortable).
The idea that we will one day die is uncomfortable. (All creatures have a self-preservation instinct).
In order to prevent the anxiety associated with the idea that we may one day die, we invent the idea that we will not die. A 'spirit' or 'life force' will live on. This allows us to go on about our lives without the undue worry about ultimate annihilation.

After this it gets a bit more fuzzy than it already is.

I think that we have come to a point where we are even more self-conscious. We are aware of how our evolutionary past has shaped our thinking and behaviour. We can see how some of the adaptions to surviving are not ideal. We may have entered into a post-evolutionary realm, where it is we who can shape our future by an awareness of the forces at work.

Is that worrisome?

Other Comments by Frankus1122

31. Comment #373432 by Sally Luxmoore on May 5, 2009 at 6:21 pm

I agree. However, sadly, justice does not always get meted out now. The meek never will inherit the earth (though the Greek might, and the cheesemakers are blessed).

Life's a bitch, and then you die.

Well - for some people anyway.

For me, Richard's words from Unweaving the Rainbow are the most helpful of all. We really have already won the lottery. Whatever we do with it, we've already been lucky. It's churlish and anyway pointless to want more.

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

32. Comment #373446 by Daniella on May 5, 2009 at 7:08 pm

Re: Comment 14. By Nova

I agree I had a problem with that section too. A bit of woo trying to get passed off as rational.

And what's with:

What goes on happens at a level not accessible to scientists, theologians, mystics, physicists, philosophers or psychiatrists. It's a human kind of a thing.

Scientists et al are not human?

Other Comments by Daniella

33. Comment #373450 by Steve Zara on May 5, 2009 at 7:19 pm

Comment #373432 by Sally Luxmoore

It's churlish and anyway pointless to want more.

I find it a bit hard to be grateful for being alive where there is nothing or no-one to be grateful to. I have won no lottery, because before I became self-aware, there was no-one in a position to lose!

(As I find happens with some of Richard's writings, I find how he writes very beautiful, and I realise the message he is trying to put across, but I find myself disagreeing).

I don't think it is churlish to want more. I think it is inspiring and challenging.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

34. Comment #373451 by Lucas on May 5, 2009 at 7:20 pm

I for one would welcome relative immortality, as long as I could kill myself if I wanted. I'm all about science helping me live longer, even to the degree of losing my current body. Transfer my consciousness into a Galactus-sized cyborg body that can fly through the universe at many times light speed? Yes please!

Aside from trying to living as long as possible while still having fun, I accept the probability of imminent death in any given situation. It ain't no biggie. I like Ebert's attitude. I don't find it fatalistic or sad at all. ...mig got it right. Sounds pretty Taoist. Which is the first and the only way of thinking even remotely entangled with religion that this atheist has ever had any use for.

EDIT: Frankus, interesting post (32). For the first part, let me suggest The Denial of Death by Ernest Becker. I've only made it through the first twenty or so pages, but it seems to address in detail what you're talking about. For the second part, I think you may be right and I don't think it's worrisome at all. It could get weird, or downright creepy, surely, if we think about using our hyperconsciousness to design ourselves and our world in an extreme way. But generally, isn't that sort of what being smart is for?

Other Comments by Lucas

35. Comment #373457 by Frankus1122 on May 5, 2009 at 7:29 pm

Lucas,

I also like the idea of having the option of living, if not forever, then a really long, long time.

Transfer my consciousness into a Galactus-sized cyborg body that can fly through the universe at many times light speed? Yes please!

Me too!

Imagine all the books you could read in a hundred years. That would be okay with me. I could probably get into some good music and other arts too.

I am all for trying to extend my life as much as possible because I like it.
Maybe there is some of that evolutionary driven anxiety reduction mechanism at work in me wanting to extend my life but whatever. I am desiring to extend my real life not anticipating anything else once I'm dead.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

36. Comment #373459 by Lucas on May 5, 2009 at 7:37 pm

Or, Frankus, dig this: if we can in "80 years with luck or even less" learn enough to design the human world in a very deliberate and healthy way, imagine what we could do if we had lifespans of 1000? Wouldn't those 1000 year old dudes know a bunch of great shit that would be super useful? Maybe... and this is WAY off the top of my head... the desire to live as long as possible is a biological imperative exactly BECAUSE we'd be better off as a whole if we could live longer and learn and communicate more?

I am all for trying to extend my life as much as possible because I like it.

Word. That mixed with the serene acceptance of death, your own and that of all the things around you, and I think you're good. Sure beats fantasies of an afterlife.

Other Comments by Lucas

37. Comment #373463 by j.mills on May 5, 2009 at 7:53 pm

Meh. Guy writes a lot, doesn't say much.

You folks wanting to extend your lives, don't forget to work out how we're going to (a) limit the population, and (b) fund all this. Galactus cyborgs don't grow on trees, you know.

Anyway, everything I know about life I learnt from obscure CDs:

And the best thing you ever did for me
Was to help me take my life less seriously -
It's only life, after all.
------------------Indigo Girls

To be an ever-opening flower!
No explanation, gotta work it out,
You know we got the power.
------------------Yes

You say I took the name in vain.
I don't even know the name,
But if I did, well really, what's it to ya?
There's a blaze of light in every word,
It doesn't matter which ya heard,
The holy or the broken hallelujah.
------------------His Leonardship

It's a mighty road we travel
But the truth is,
We're only passin' through.
------------------Don Henley & Johnny Cash

(Anyone can play!)

Other Comments by j.mills

38. Comment #373468 by Brian English on May 5, 2009 at 8:13 pm

I think J.Mills just made an important point. There's a bloody lot of us around now, and we are not living in a sustainable way. The resources required to keep us alive as we age, perhaps alive for 150 years, and those of future generations, especially when some of us breed like proverbial rabbits may not be around. I believe there was a UN study a few years ago that concluded that for all humanity living a western lifestyle back then, there'd need to be 4 Earths to provide resources like food, air, sustainable poop recycling, etc. I think striving to improve the world and make life better for all is a primary aim. The question is how to do that without making the Earth a cesspool of our own excreta. If all we do is breed, with only 5% or less of humanity having a half-decent life, then we aren't striving, or achieving any good except perhaps in our own little enclaves of wealth and health. My thoughts are that we need to empower women, via education and whatever, so that they don't continue to be baby factories in most parts of the world, hopefully bringing in an era of depopulation by attrition. Something that go for growth politicians would reject because negative population growth will obviously lead to negative growth of economics and that in the long term. Regarding depopulation by attrition, maybe we should not to be so horrified by death. Once you're gone, all evidence suggests it hurts you not a bit. I'm not recommending forced killings, social-darwinism, depriving the sick of health care (that happens enough in western countries right now, let alone poor ones), etc, just that there's nothing wrong with bowing out when it's your time, instead of hanging on for years in some decrepit state. I'm pro-euthanasia and pro choice about death I suppose and pro choice for women viz reproduction obviously.....

I shall end my drivel with some talk of Hume, as is customary:

His cheerfulness was so great, and his conversation and amusements run so much in their usual strain, that, notwithstanding all bad symptoms, many people could not believe he was dying. “I shall tell your friend, Colonel Edmondstone,” said Doctor Dundas to him one day, “that I left you much better, and in a fair way of recovery.” “Doctor,” said he, “as I believe you would not chuse to tell any thing but the truth, you had better tell him, that I am dying as fast as my enemies, if I have any, could wish, and as easily and cheerfully as my best friends could desire.” Colonel Edmondstone soon afterwards came to see him, and take leave of him; and on his way home, he could not forbear writing him a letter bidding him once more an eternal adieu, and applying to him, as to a dying man, the beautiful French verses in which the Abbé Chaulieu, in expectation of his own death, laments his approaching separation from his friend, the Marquis de la Fare. Mr. Hume’s magnanimity and firmness were such, that his most affectionate friends knew, that they hazarded nothing in talking or writing to him as to a dying man, and that so far from being hurt by this frankness, he was rather pleased and flattered by it. I happened to come into his room while he was reading this letter, which he had just received, and which he immediately showed me. I told him, that though I was sensible how very much he was weakened, and that appearances were in many respects very bad, yet his cheerfulness was still so great, the spirit of life seemed still to be so very strong in him, that I could not help entertaining some faint hopes. He answered, “Your hopes are groundless. ... I am sensible, besides, that some of my vital parts are affected, so that I must soon die.” ......

But, though Mr. Hume always talked of his approaching dissolution with great cheerfulness, he never affected to make any parade of his magnanimity. He never mentioned the subject but when the conversation naturally led to it, and never dwelt longer upon it than the course of the conversation happened to require: it was a subject indeed which occurred pretty frequently, in consequence of the inquiries which his friends, who came to see him, naturally made concerning the state of his health.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php?title=704&chapter=137475&layout=html&Itemid=27

Other Comments by Brian English

39. Comment #373470 by Lucas on May 5, 2009 at 8:16 pm

j.mills - Yeah, the limiting the population thing is part of the creepy part I mentioned, so let's just let our imaginations take us where they may on that one for now and leave it at that. However, both that and the cost problem you mention, though valid in a real world scenario for sure, don't really apply to what I was saying, because it was a fantastical point to begin with. Believe me, I'll feel lucky as hell to get a replacement hip (or liver) at some point. For that matter, toothbrushes are cool! I get to keep my teeth!

Brian -

I think striving to improve the world and make life better for all is a primary aim.

For sure. What if that necessitates, for reasons I described, longer life spans for some, and on the dark side of it, a lot less humans overall?

If all we do is breed, with only 5% or less of humanity having a half-decent life, then we aren't striving, or achieving any good except perhaps in our own little enclaves of wealth and health.

Surely a possibility, but what if the existence of such enclaves allows people to figure out how to make everyone live with more freedom, health, and happiness?

My thoughts are that we need to empower women, via education and whatever, so that they don't continue to be baby factories in most parts of the world, hopefully bringing in an era of depopulation by attrition.

That would be ideal, but I don't hold out any hope of such a thing actually happening, or at least not happening fast enough to avoid the population crisis point. You seem to know why, because you say it right after that. I try to avoid saying this very often, but really, I don't think there is any way to avoid some future global ugliness of one sort or another to reduce the population to resource ratio to something once again manageable. It's not pleasant to think about, but I acknowledge it as a likely possibility (and one I'd hope to avoid witnessing personally). Of course it'd be nice to be able to do something to head that off, and I'm not saying we shouldn't give it our all, but I don't think there will ever be enough of us trying to do that to fight against history in such a way.

Other Comments by Lucas

40. Comment #373471 by lastgreekstanding on May 5, 2009 at 8:22 pm

Brian,

The question is how to do that without making the Earth a cesspool of our own excreta.

Nanotechnology.

Give science a chance, Brian. :)

Other Comments by lastgreekstanding

41. Comment #373473 by Brian English on May 5, 2009 at 8:26 pm

lgs, do you really think that we can pop into existence some possible technology that will stop us from ruining the Earth before it's too late? We're loosing quite a lot of arrable land, and cute critters right now. I hope you're right, but how will nanotechnology provide clean water/food/etc without us destroying forests/animals/etc in the near future? It sounds a bit like carbon sequestration to me. Politicians don't want to upset the economic egg-cart by bringing in a carbon-tax on polluters, so they say that technology by carbon sequestration will save the day. All this without knowing if the technology is feasible.....It seems to me that we can do things now, things that we know can work, instead of putting all our eggs in one basket.

If your nanotechnology post was just being humourous then you got me. ;)

Other Comments by Brian English

42. Comment #373476 by j.mills on May 5, 2009 at 8:28 pm

Great. A cesspool full of nanytes. (Nanocytes? Nanobots? Nancy-bots? Nangibles?)

Let's just hope they're good on toast.

(EDIT: Nandwiches?)

Other Comments by j.mills

43. Comment #373477 by Brian English on May 5, 2009 at 8:31 pm

I guess nanotechnology is the next Deus ex machina? Sort of like hobbits at Mount Doom. :)

Other Comments by Brian English

44. Comment #373478 by Sciros on May 5, 2009 at 8:34 pm

Immortality would be PURE AWESOME. I have no problem with living forever. If it drives me nuts eventually, well, I'll be nuts! So who cares! And until then, it would be totally sweet. Though yeah I'd need some other superpowers to go with the immortality...

Other Comments by Sciros

45. Comment #373480 by Brian English on May 5, 2009 at 8:36 pm

Sciros, would you take your immortality if it were at the cost of a lot of others being worse off for it?
Personally, I'm not big on the idea of living forever. Each to his own, as I think it's a moot point in any case.

Other Comments by Brian English

46. Comment #373482 by chewedbarber on May 5, 2009 at 8:37 pm

We just need to convert ourselves into code, then we can live for incredible lengths of time. But, I'm not leaving anyone I know in charge of keeping the power on!

Other Comments by chewedbarber

47. Comment #373483 by Steve Zara on May 5, 2009 at 8:39 pm

Comment #373473 by Brian English

Just consider how the prospect of even two or three more decades of life than their current expected lifespan would concentrate the minds of people alive now on dealing with the problems you describe. If we could confidently expect to live to 100-120, then we would certainly see significant effects of global warming.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

48. Comment #373485 by zeroangel on May 5, 2009 at 8:43 pm

chewedbarber:

We just need to convert ourselves into code, then we can live for incredible lengths of time.

I think all this will do is create software copies of ourselves. You "yourself" will still die with the biological death of your physical "brain."

I guess a strange question might be a slow replacement of brain parts with computer hardware, like a Ship of Theseus, but with your own brain/mind. That could be an interesting question.

Other Comments by zeroangel

49. Comment #373486 by Brian English on May 5, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Hi Steve, I see your point, but seeing the effects of global warming, something most scientists say we can see now, and seeing millions of people starve, or fight over resources that seem to be dwindling now, not to mention the loss of species, while we await a future time where we live to 120 doesn't seem that comforting to me. It may be that we come up with a silver bullet, to borrow a phrase from the turd who resides in Kiribilly, but wouldn't it be better if we went the less sexy route of ameliorating things today, and when or if the silver bullet arrives, then we're doubly safe?

If we could educate folks to have less kids, then we will have less to deal with later. I get annoyed with World Vision and other aid organizations that feed starving people in crisis, but by doing nothing to help stop the population growth, like education (I guess World Vision is Christian so they want more Christian soldiers not less), they are just feeding the future breeders (which they must) to create a new generation of starving mouths which must be fed at the next crisis.....

Other Comments by Brian English

50. Comment #373488 by Lucas on May 5, 2009 at 8:47 pm

would you take your immortality if it were at the cost of a lot of others being worse off for it?

Sorry to hijack your question to Sciros, Brian, but what do you mean by worse off? Do you mean life full of suffering or do you mean dead? Or never alive to begin with? What sounds better to you, a planet with 20 billion people all sick and suffering and trying to eat each other, or a planet with 1 billion people that is a natural paradise full of all sorts of creatures, including 1000 year old humans who keep it that way?

Sorry about all the question marks, I'm just throwing this stuff out there. Not trying to be obstinate or anything. I don't have any solid answers myself.

Other Comments by Lucas

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 4 | Next | Last