Curious statement. Explain that for us mere curious observers.
Damn double posts.
Are you sure?
The fanciful idealist reveals themselves.
All they have is their faith within their own wishful thinking despite all contrary reality that confronts them.
Actually I am not fully sure , there are parts or breeds of humanity that will die off , become extinct but, others will evolve to survive and become other than what we know humans to be. Natural immunities, ability to adapt physically and or mentally. Look at all the disinfectants and antibiotics those of the civilized world use. These weaken the body. What about those that have adapted and survived? Third and second world humans are becoming different then first world humans. Evolving in a different way. They could survive where we could not. Their future as humans could evolve down a path that could not be human.
There are also or even exclusively cultural reasons, especially economical and social (“social selection”, “social state”) reasons.
That’s not what i meant at all. It is of no consequence that an asteroid may or may not hit. One may have wiped out the dinosaurs many millions of years ago, but that suggests such things are extremely rare, and one can assume it’s less likely to occur in a short time-frame.
Secondly, that it is not a valid argument! To insist that humanity must not progress upon something that may or may not happen, is very unlikely, and if it does happen there is nothing we can at present do about it, is ludicrous.
The op simply states that given continual development, it is possible for humanity to know such things.
_
You assume other extinctionary events beyond the self destruction of humanity against itself such as universal externals will let us have that opportunity.
Please remember that the universe is an infinite shooting gallery where planets are targets and indeed have average lifespans.
The curious quest of humanity’s infantile desire to be immortal is something to behold and bare witness to.
rofl , you forget that i used the word could not would or will. Possible outcomes are too many to be sure of anything. And who the hell would want immortalty? I sure do not
The curious quest of humanity’s infantile desire to justify his extension is something to behold and bare witness to. Makes one wonder who put him up to it.
The mind is interested in creating an artificial immortality – of an entity, soul, self, whatever you want to call it. It knows in a way that it is coming to an end somewhere along the line, and its survival, its continuity, its status quo depends upon the continuity of the body. But body is not in any way involved with the thought, because it has no beginning, it has no end. It is the thought that has created the two points – this is the birth and that is the death.
You would not respective to the conditions you set, which are based in the non-immortal realm of thought, nature and being. If when you die you become one with your immortal self [soul], your thinking would be based in that and not e.g. This world of suffering. I am not saying that’s the case, just that philosophically we have to look at worldly observational derivatives as our basis for such sentiments.
Perhaps but, it sounds utterly boring to be aware forever.
I agree, however that’s because we are thinking of an endless duration of finite moments in time [as like it comes to us here on earth], as opposed to infinite time all in one gulp - so to say, or some other kind of time.
All i am saying is that it is earthly things which drag us down and make us wish it to end. 
which is also an emotional state ~ equally earthly.
Can’t outrun or fight infinite, time, space, and even death itself.
Even the great pyramids and Sphinx are slowly crumbling into ruin eroding in decay.
True but, not my train of thought. Infinite time , finite material, inevitable cycles. Material and possible combos would be finite at some point repeating would start occuring again and again and again to the point all outcomes are burned into you. Even if other dimensions and universes were at your disposal, complete knowledge would be yours and you would begin to find a way to end yourself.
Interesting point about repetition. Inevitably even infinite variance would have enough similarity for things to become familiar.
That’s a bit like life is a story though, but living it is different. You may not ever want your loved ones to end, even if every day is just another day. Especially if there was no death disease etc. You certainly wouldn’t wish for the negatives like death for them, as opposed to continuance. I wouldn’t mind a few aeons in the otherworld, prior to existential termination.
Is life only a problem if there were no way to end it?
How long does true love truly exist? At some eon love will turn at the very least to apathy. You may not wish death on them if loved turned to hate, life could become a punishment. You could wish death for a true love if you see they are in a nonending agony that will get worse. Variables make seeming absolutes questionable.
Interesting apathetic perspective there. I think [?] that love is a natural state and one of spiritual balance. I think Buddha and others experienced a kind of oneness with nature, you often get religious scenes of animals calmly sat by the side of someone who has obtained balance. This is a way i visualise love as a general thing an individual can have. I think that if anyone and a partner achieved such an internal balance, their spiritual/metaphysical sphere’s would naturally mirror one another = mutual love.
I sometimes wonder if that is simply our most natural state, as opposed to being an ‘enlightenment’ specifically and particularly. It’s just that the world constantly takes us out of balance, making us nervous and at extremes neurotic.
_