[FoRK] Radical Longevity

Albert S. <albert.scherbinsky at rogers.com> on Tue Apr 24 18:24:30 PDT 2007

--- Tom Higgins <tomhiggins at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 4/24/07, Albert S.
> <albert.scherbinsky at rogers.com> wrote:
> > What substitute does Science have for this? 
> You mean science needs to come up with Pepsi
> alternatives to every religious Coke feature?

I'm not saying Science has to do anything. An
interesting premise is the idea that Religion could be
replaced by some Science based system. You can reject
that as a premise if you want, but then the discussion
ends for you.

> Besides, you are, I think, forgetting why it is the
> hereafter makes so
> many people feel so warm and good that they are
> willing to tithe,
> lobotomize and in some cases die for that belief
> .....becuase life
> here SUCKS for so many. For some its being born into
> eons old
> conflicts that have left the land spoiled, the
> economic resources few
> and very little options for a future other than
> revenge or death. For
> others its being sold a bill of promises early on in
> life that can
> never be fulfilled, so they feel life just sucks
> becuase they are not
> what they were told they would be or that the world
> around them is not
> the fairy tale land they were told it would be.
> Others find the events
> in their life just too much to deal with so rather
> than take them on
> they subjugate their reality to one that paints a
> rosy picture of what
> is to come after this shitty deal is over.

OK, that's a good point. Improving the average persons
lot in their mortal life would mitigate the need to
believe in an afterlife. Atheism does appear to be
associated with more educated and well off people, so
there may be something to that. Nonetheless, theism is
plentiful in the same places. 

> 
> So yea, life extension is all good and all that ,
> but the quality of
> that life had better be a damn sight better than
> what we are currently
> getting in many of the hot spots of this world or
> what we are going to
> wind up with is very old very wealthy ruling classes
> pushing the under
> 80 crowd around like pawns in chess.

Another good point, with radical longevity wealth
might concentrate in those who had been around
longest.
 
Albert

More information about the FoRK mailing list