It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Everlasting life..Possible? Historically accurate?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 10:30 PM
I have begun a new blog solely based on my beliefs that mankind was initially meant to live longer lives but somehow we have been limited be it by genetic altering or otherwise.

I am VERY interested in learning as much as I possibly can which I can also include on my site.

What sites are you aware of with information regarding such a topic?
What is your contention and why do you believe the way you do?

My site is linked in my signature and it's just a start, feel free to read what I have compiled thud far and feel free to add to my research here.

I would greatly appreciate it.

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 11:00 PM
reply to post by fixourgenes

Provided summary:
In The Evolution of Death, Shostak argues that humans are already following an evolutionary trajectory of declining birth rate and growing longevity, and that this can be promoted through tissue engineering to eliminate aging-related death.

There are numerous evolutionary theories regarding death as a survival mechanism for biological lifeforms. It seems that there are very few environmental conditions, which would lead to the emergence of immortality as a biological characteristic in any species. Maybe it took a lot of energy for competing genes to constantly encode for the production of young, fit individuals, and so the total duration of their lifetimes were exponentially diminished as a result of this production cost.

On a side note: It is remarkable that self awareness emerged on this planet. It would have been even more remarkable, and even less probable, that immortality find its way into a sentient, self aware organism. Maybe sentience or self awareness can't evolve in immortal organisms? Personally, I believe self aware cognition offers greater advantages to organisms which have a very short life span. It would enhance the quality of their survival fitness in ways unimaginable for the very short duration of life that such organisms inevitably have.

Anyway, there's no reason to doubt that with sufficient technological advancements and developments in the future, whether robotic, genetic, or pharmacological, that age-related death could be cured entirely within the next one thousand years or so. Otherwise there are other methods, which might be more preferable, including cybernetic singularity, or brain-robot integration. The removal of the biological component of the conscious being that is the homo sapiens species might be a technically and economically more viable option. This human body is a fairly random construct shaped by millions of years of evolution by various arbitrary environmental conditions, including competition from other biological species and competition with nature itself. The costs associated with transferring the mind into a fitness superior (immortal) body might eventually be lower than extending human life itself.

Ultimately we have to ask ourselves a very complex question.

Which is more valuable: the experience of living a human life, or the immortality of some random consciousness entity?

[edit on 22-1-2009 by cognoscente]

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 10:09 PM
Any other discussion on this topic?

I find it fascinating and would love to see a real discussion on the possibilities and theories relating to the topic.

new topics

log in