## Death is Bad
Death is to be avoided because of the fact we cease to exist should we die, and fear of death is good because it helps us to have a sense of self preservation, and may help us to overcome death.
Some will argue that death is good. That it helps us to avoid some naturally bad things such as overpopulation. They will also tell you that we should not fear death and give various arguments for this, most famously by lucretius and by epicurus.
Some of this is just a way to cope with death. Some of it is legitimate criticism and fear for a society where some individuals have access to life extension technologies, while others don't.
I can imagine the outrage if somebody were to argue that we should not cure aids because it helps curb overpopulation. So why don't we get offended when people say the same about aging?
It is my belief that we don't because we fear death so much that we are almost in denial that we will die. We cope with the inevitable by pretending we want it.
It is like in this study where somebody makes a piece of IKEA furniture or is offered a more expensive furniture to trade it for,when they are done building it. Most people deny the more expensive furniture because if the prior investment.
https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/11-091.pdf
This is why you will hear people proclaim. "Death is good and we should welcome it". They have fooled themselves thinking it is better merely because it was unavoidable, however now that avoiding it is within grasp, this psychological coping mechanism will prevent us from achieving it sooner.
Everyday that passes more people die from aging. With the prevention of it possible in our lifetimes every man woman and child on the planet should be working on it's arrival. Just like how Americans came together during world war 1 and 2. Everybody was a part of that war movement because winning those wars was the most important thing on the planet at that time.
I heard it said by Ayn Rand who got it from somebody else. That when she dies the world will end. This is true. As far as any of us know we seize to exist upon death. As leo tolstoy talked about. Life gives meaning. Like the age old question, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
Our existence gives meaning to life. If nobody is around to enjoy the apple from a tree, than the apple serves no purpose. Beyond that, if we die than what we have done is for nothing. There are two solutions for this, and I believe both to be important. Though some just choose the first.
First. The only thing that matters is this moment. Enjoy it to the best of your ability. Make this moment count. However, once the moment has passed, it no longer matters. The only way to make any of this matter is to achieve immortality.
That is mainly why we should pursue it. So our entire lives are not pointless. However before we pursue it, we should deal with whether we can even create for ourselves an indefinite lifespan at all.
## Common Objections to Radical Life extension
The most common arguments against preventing people from dying earlier than necessary is the following;
1. If people die less than there will be overpopulation
For this to be a good argument, you have to assume that people will just stop dying from other ways or that this will always be a problem and never solvable. Hell, even if we took the Logan’s run approach and just killed everybody once they hit 150, it would still be an improvement on the status quo, where most of us are dead by 80.
I certainly would not advocate for the Logan’s run solution. If we take into account the mortality rate, of people from dying of non age related diseases, and do the math the average lifespan would be about 1200 years. [5] This is assuming that people just don’t feel like they are done at earlier ages like at the 200 or 500 year marker. So we won’t just be filling up the world indefinitely.
In 1968 the book “The Population Bomb”, made similar over crowding predictions as my opponent is likely to make. It predicted mass famine would occur in first world countries, that we would no longer be able to sustain a growing population. It failed to take into account that we would see progress in food production, transportation and in other industries that pushed back those predictions and will continue to do so as technology advances. With advances in global standard of living, we will also see a reduction in reproduction. Industrialized nations see a reduced amount of reproduction.[6] Population Alarmists are misguided.
2. We Would Get bored
I disagree, and life is fun. It would take thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years to run out of novel things to try. I could think of about 200 things I could take an entire year exploring off the top of my head, this excludes things that would be fun that take considerably less or more time to explore
3. Only the Rich would benefit
I think this is silly as well. When a technology first comes out, it is xpensive, like the computer, which got a man to the moon. Now we have the same computer power, within our cellphones.[7]
4. Society would stagnate
This is hard to get behind when you see what people did late in life. Such as Beethoven late in life, or colonel Sanders with his 13 original herbs and spices, or John Glenn's space flight at 77.[8]
sources
## We Can live forever
Imagine living in a time where people get around on horseback. a place where there is no refrigeration, you just keep your food in a cool cellar. For comfort you don't have TV or radio, you have a book and the more your read it by candlelight when nightfall comes, the more your eyesight weakens. This isn't as far back as you may think. There was a gentleman who watched Abraham Lincoln die in 1865. There was a guy like that who does have an interview you can watch in 1956. His name was [Samuel J. Seymore. [14]](
https://www.businessinsider.com/interview-with-the-last-living-witness-of-the-lincoln-assassination-2019-7)
This man was born into the world described. He went from living in a world where people got around on horseback, to one where people took trips on planes, A place where a family was lucky to have electricity to a world where nearly every man woman and child had access to a television. He went from salting meats to eat later, to constantly having fresh refrigerated food on hand.
The world they live in today, will be as alien to to our kids as the 1960s was to Mr. Seymore. These changes happened to Seymore in a slow gradual way, and only looking back does this technological advancement look fast. It's the same for me at 40. All the changes came slow from tapes, to CD's to MP3's and then the slow transition to just listening to music on my phone. It's only looking back that I can see how alien the world has become, and you too will have this experience.
The whole point of relaying that information to you is to show you that these slow gradual changes really add up and some changes look miraculous if you were to just jump your life 20 years, but are mundane when you experience it as it happens. Slow increases in life expectancy won't be noticed as you experience them, and then one day you are looking at your mother who is now celebrating her 500 year birthday and maybe you will pause to think.... "How the fuck did this happen?".
Life expectancy is currently about [80 years old. [1]](
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy) People watching Mr. Seymore on television in the 1950s explaining that he saw Lincoln shot in the head, would be dumbfounded at the alien world he lived in. The people watching that show had a [life expectancy of 40 years old. [1]](
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy) The doubling of life expectancy between their time and ours had to be a welcome surprise. Had some health conscious person debated them saying he would live to be 100 many of those people would tell him, he was crazy.
To achieve life extension to get us from 80 to allowing us to live to 200, we don’t need a big leap in technology. Baby steps are good enough. The currently we are progressing on average of adding 3 months of lifespan for [every year we are alive. [2]](
https://www.who.int/gho/mortality_burden_disease/life_tables/situation_trends_text/en/) In order to reach escape velocity, all we need to do is add one year of life, for every single year we are alive.
