X-Message-Number: 23775 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:35:32 -0700 From: Mike Perry <> Subject: Life extension and "selfishness" Linda, #23769: >For people who have lived a long >healthy life, isn't it selfish to want to extend that life further? >The planet can only support so many people. What about all the "souls " >that are going to be born? Just wondering. A number of responses are possible, other than simply being anti-life-extensionist. As for "the planet can only support so many people," people could move off-planet; this will no doubt be a future possibility along with control of aging. (True, this solution will not work indefinitely, unless exponential population growth is halted or some very exotic possibilities with physics are realized, but would give us breathing room.) "What about all the 'souls' that are going to be born?" You are, evidently, assuming that many, many more people are going to be born in a relatively short time, which is not a foregone conclusion. (Generally, birth rates are falling worldwide. They might fall much faster still if the prospect developed of substantial, healthy life extension.) So far, the number of cryonicists is a most insignificant fraction of the world's population anyway, and would have virtually no effect on the population problem. "For people who have lived a long healthy life, isn't it selfish to want to extend that life further?" If this is made into a positive assertion it is likely to raise hackles among cryonicists. Actually, I see two senses of "selfish"--only one with negative connotations. If you draw breath or eat a meal, that's "selfish" isn't it?--done for reasons of self-interest. Yet this sort of thing doesn't seem wrong, it's not unreasonably selfish. (A bank robber is normally being unreasonably selfish, however. Another point sometimes made is that all motivation is selfish in some sense, so you can't escape being "selfish" and at best can only make it reasonable and enlightened.) We cryonicists generally feel that for us to want to go on living, however long, is not unreasonably selfish, but a system that would stand in the way of that--demanding we die at some point--would be unreasonable in some way. Many of us too are confident that in the future any problems that would be solved by our death could be handled better without it. Personally I think it is possible, and rewarding, to do enough *good* in the world to justify one's continued presence in a state of health and competence, for however long. A life rightly lived is never rightly ended. Mike Perry Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23775