Angry Monolith

No, not like that...

Daily Galaxy recently posted an article on longevity and the possibility of living to 1,000. The article is good, but not remarkable, but what is interesting is that this article made it to the front page of digg, a social news site that get upwards of a million visitors a day. For something that a decade ago was considered science fiction to be considered legitimate news is a huge step forward. Here’s what the article said:

“Cambridge University geneticist Aubrey de Grey has famously stated, “The first person to live to be 1,000 years old is certainly alive today …whether they realize it or not, barring accidents and suicide, most people now 40 years or younger can expect to live for centuries…

…There are many, many different components of ageing and we are chipping away at all of them,” said Robert Freitas at the Institute for Molecular Manufacturing, a non-profit, nanotech group in Palo Alto, California. “It will take time and, if you put it in terms of the big developments of modern technology, say the telephone, we are still about 10 years off from Alexander Graham Bell shouting to his assistant through that first device. Still, in the near future, say the next two to four decades, the disease of ageing will be cured.”

Actually, even though I said there wasn’t a lot of uniqueness to this article earlier, there is a very interesting of discussion of people who don’t believe longevity is possible or even ethical.

“I just don’t think [immortality] is possible,” says Sherwin Nuland, a professor of surgery at the Yale School of Medicine. “Aubrey and the others who talk of greatly extending lifespan are oversimplifying the science and just don’t understand the magnitude of the task. His plan will not succeed. Were it to do so, it would undermine what it means to be human.” (Emphasis mine)

This is an important point, and one I think we all need to consider. There is no contention that much of what gives life its meaning is the fact that we die at the end of it - without that constant threat, will we be able to produce such beautiful works of art, and will we even have a desire to live if the threat of death doesn’t drive us to succeed and endure?

Of course, most longevity enthusiasts don’t suggest that they can completely defeat death, only stave it off for longer than previously considered possible. I do have some fear that if this comes to pass, then it will mark an end to an era of human productivity, or worse. Yes, would it not be wonderful if Einstein or Michaelangelo or Shakespeare had lived to work and produce for centuries, but what of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon? What do we have to fear from an immortal dictator, or an undying tyrant?

In any case, I think this article is a little optimistic - it simplifies the process of defeating aging quite a bit, but it bears consideration. As in all things, I think that this is a supremely ethical act. Humans deserve the right to choose to live or not to, if it is within our power to give them that choice. And more than I fear an end to beauty and productivity, I look forward to a marked shift in the paradigm of human existence that will come about through an end to aging.

Check out the article, it’s definitely worth a read. Link.