So, In what ways do you think Man will achieve immortality?
I personally think that Man will create a being in his likeness to govern the universe after Mankind itself has vanished. A likeness of metal and gears, a mind of wires and electroneurons. Governed by three rules. Were we meant to create the “janitors”, if you will, of the cosmos?
It is only by amplifying the Truth that anything can hope to achieve immortality. In most instances it seems to be a matter of definition, being the best whatever you are that you can be, or different in a good (read ‘needed’) fashion; in the case of man it is not so clear. Perhaps by being some kind of footstool (a moderator? ), or a person of faith?
Why build a machine that’s already built? Because to can’t find the power button? Maybe it’s not yours to turn on? Maybe you are the power button; and you’re not in place, you’re off building an image of a machine for no good reason.
But yes, it’s quite possible that humans will build intelligent beings from non-organic compounds. Whether we do or not probably depends more on our morality than our technology. That is, the question in my mind is whether humans will survive long enough to allow for the fruitation of our technology.
But as I’ve alluded, even if we manage to create non-organic intelligence, immortality is still a tall order. Our non-organic children would have to escape the death of our Sun, the expansive flattening of the Universe, entropy itself, and beyond, in order to claim immortality. That would be a tall order indeed.
By the way, has anyone noticed that we’re forever lamenting that death arrives too soon, but almost never do we despair at our having been born too late? In other words, even if I should be immortal from this day forward, I’ve still come late to the “party of life” by at least 15 billion years.
Grave markers of Roman Legionnaires, from Britain to the Middle-East, were commonly inscribed with this epitaph
Good point, I didn’t even consider these factors in my definition of immortality and the length of time involved… God i love this site.
That’s great how the romans put that on their tombstones, it seems we can learn a lot from the romans and the greeks. Rome herself was a simple (relatively) and effective society
Excellent points, Polemarchus, as always. I agree that the death of our universe makes complete immortality problematic. Still, I think our knowledge of the universe is infantile enough to make catagorical statements about the fate of the cosmos with air tight confidence.
I have said on many occasions that whether you could live for one year or a billion would matter not a while after a billion and one years. The only difference is that by that time your ennui may have grown unbearable.
We humans put such emphasis on the importance of what we do with our free time, knowing full well its infinate nature. It seems a silly thing to plot points on an infinte plain, but we all do it, and will continue to do it, becuase talking the talk is one thing, but walking the walk is another story. If we never died, we would live just as long as if we died tomorrow.
That being said, I am pretty sure that the time will come where we are able to upload out minds into computers, and live on forever in our next stage of evolution. Lets just hope microsoft doesn’t write the code
There is the machine based approached as discussed above or the biological approach where medical science can keep us in our original bodies for hundreds of years and then perhaps transferring our consciousness to a new, cloned, body. This is perhaps the most likely for human immortality, but I like the idea cyber-romantic idea that we live on through our robot children.
What about the way we use our immortality? 160 years watching tv with our feet up is not the best way to use the gift given to us. A race that would spend an eternity working to better themselves, on the other hand, would create some wonders I think.