Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Laboratory >

The Arrogance of Immortality

We're The Great Old Ones Now

06:49 / 23.05.03

So last night, over my Red Chicken Curry, I was verbally assailed by the diner to my left, who stated that cryonic freezing as a parachute option in the event of one's own death was 'arrogant'. The jist of the argument expressed around the sticky rice was that you get one shot, that's your lot, and further survival is an arrogant imposition on the world and the rest of humanity.

Being as I was nettled by this bald and in-your-face rejection of the idea, I responded by asking in what way it was more of an imposition on humanity at large than living in the West on the proceeds of colonialism and driving a thirsty car.

This went down badly.

But the whole discussion got me thinking - is the desire for immortality - or at least, continued life - arrogant? Is it immoral? Do I care?

Aside from which, there were questions about practicality - whether the Soul - or the Standing Wave - could be returned to a body which had 'died', or whether a new person would be created. Interestingly, the assembled company acknowledged that the same question applied to someone revived after flatlining.

Anyway.

Arrogant? Unethical? Insane? Immoral?

07:20 / 23.05.03

I had always thought that a greatly increased lifespan for humans would lead to a greater understanding of our impact on the whole planet - kind of being around to see the outcome of the damage we do - and this in turn would lead us to be more responsible towards the earth (and maybe each other).

As for arrogance, I can see where your dining companion is coming from, but as lots of aspects of modern human existence are an imposition on the world and the rest of humanity we are an inherently arrogant species. Not that I'm advocating mass suicide for the good of the planet!

Being an atheist, I don't believe in a soul, so the revived flatliners are still the same person they were when they 'died' (providing there was not significant brain damage).

Ultimately the only moral/ethical guide is ourselves, and what we think is acceptable - which has and will change over time. As the impact we are having on the world becomes obvious, our moral/ethical compass will be forced to shift - SUV drivers becomming pariahs for the gross consumption of limited fuel etc.

Sorry if this rambles, there is a lot in Nick's original post, and I wanted to cover as much of it as I could.

11:35 / 23.05.03

Nick - I'm not really sure where is assumption of arrogance comes from - is it religious in nature? ie god made us finite and to dream of being otherwise would put us at odds with god's grand design.

Certainly I have trouble reconciling the desire for immortality (which is still, lest we forget, still way out of our grasp) as being more immoral than say the desire to have children in an already overpopulated world.

13:42 / 23.05.03

Just about everybody wants to live; what's wrong with that? Cryonic suspension is rare and has so little social impact that it's not worth worrying about. Later it could become more of a social burden, maybe if the freezers put a significant drain on the local power grid and the corpsicles (or their living representatives) became a large enough lobby to warp government policy in their favor, but that's unlikely.

It would be arrogant to assume future society considered you valuable enough to revive and support you if, say, your dotcom stock annuity tanked, but nobody asked that.