Who Wants to Live Forever? And Why?

[Thief]

The issue would still remain even if one acknowledged some entity like that: why should I worship or give it any recognition?

Well if 'It' came your way....to look you over....

 

[muichimotsu]

And now we're getting into an analogy I brought up in another thread of making a deal with an extraplanar being. Assuming this entity you speak of is possessing godlike powers, one of which could make me live indefinitely, why should I desire it? There hasn't been a compelling argument that isn't merely appealing to possibilities rather than pragmatic issues with immortality in itself, were it possible

 

[Brickjectivity]

I could enjoy eternity.

 

[muichimotsu]

Again, mere possibility. And that's a provisional thing: how long could you enjoy eternity before you start realizing that your entire perspective has radically shifted and everyone else around you will die and go away forever?

There's more qualification that would need to be added to this scenario for you not to just go insane because of the issues one can bring up with God as a perfect entity, but applied to an imperfect entity like a human.

 

[Thief]

And now we're getting into an analogy I brought up in another thread of making a deal with an extraplanar being. Assuming this entity you speak of is possessing godlike powers, one of which could make me live indefinitely, why should I desire it? There hasn't been a compelling argument that isn't merely appealing to possibilities rather than pragmatic issues with immortality in itself, were it possible

If you and the Almighty can get along with each other....
He might allow some of that creation ability unto you.

Now reconsider...

 

[muichimotsu]

Still not that interested, but this is sort of derailing into the extraplanar pact topic, which could be a separate thread. Having creation power is markedly distinct from being able to live forever, even if we're going with the basic form where I'd still die if I was stabbed with a knife in my back or such, rather than being borderline invincible.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think your idea of eternity would not be pleasant, one where you never forgot anything; but if you could forget things it would be ok.

 

[muichimotsu]

Even if I forgot things, there'd be the issue of the perspective at large: you've become severed from most of humanity, assuming there might be a few others likeyou. But it'd be isolating nonetheless

 

[Brickjectivity]

Even if I forgot things, there'd be the issue of the perspective at large: you've become severed from most of humanity, assuming there might be a few others likeyou. But it'd be isolating nonetheless

That could be true, but you could have pets and things to help you along emotionally. Plus, people would be attracted by your experience and ability to tell stories, until of course the last person died out or the race evolved beyond having any interest in you; but you could still have pets even after that.

 

[Baladas]

Sometimes I think I would like to live forever if I could. Usually, it's by way of a fantasy super-power in my whimsical mind.
It's hard to say whether I would take the chance if I were given it in whatever possible form.

It's impossible to say what my consciousness or perception would be like were it to exist in another form.
Therefore, it is impossible to say whether it would be a blessing or a curse.

Assuming it was similar to now, it could certainly turn out to be a curse.
Who knows?

 

[muichimotsu]

That could be true, but you could have pets and things to help you along emotionally. Plus, people would be attracted by your experience and ability to tell stories, until of course the last person died out or the race evolved beyond having any interest in you; but you could still have pets even after that.

Everything would die around me, even pets, since by this situation, you're the only one that's immortal. Think of being an Immortal from Highlander, there's a reason Kurgan went insane and Macleod had his own issues in being unable to really have a persistent relationship with most people.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Everything would die around me, even pets, since by this situation, you're the only one that's immortal. Think of being an Immortal from Highlander, there's a reason Kurgan went insane and Macleod had his own issues in being unable to really have a persistent relationship with most people.

I know for a fact that desire is never satisfied. Curiosity is the first sign of desire, and you can desire contradictory things. I think that every person desires every experience at all times though we are not aware of it. If you stop eating, you wish you could still be eating. When you meet someone who has been burned in a fire, you want to ask them what it was like. Yes, I want to live forever, even though I also want to die and be extinguished. The truth is I want both, but I think living forever sounds more desirable.

 

[muichimotsu]

I doubt one could simultaneously desire everything with our limited capacity for thought. Sure, we can imagine a lot of things at once, but we have to prioritize, do we not?

It only sounds more desirable because you're focusing on pure desire instead of being practical, it seems. Some times we don't need to get what we desire because it isn't in our best interests.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I doubt one could simultaneously desire everything with our limited capacity for thought. Sure, we can imagine a lot of things at once, but we have to prioritize, do we not?

Certainly I agree that we are only aware of a limited number of our desires at any given time, but any one of them even the strangest may be awakened given the right circumstances.

It only sounds more desirable because you're focusing on pure desire instead of being practical, it seems. Some times we don't need to get what we desire because it isn't in our best interests.

Now I think you are confusing practicality with desire. Desire is raw and pervades our being. Practicality is on the surface of us, a painting upon the crust of an internally hot planet. Lava is cool compared to our deepest yearnings.

 

[muichimotsu]

Awakening a desire still doesn't mean it is necessarily good overall. By situation, perhaps, a passion is beneficial, but not in excess

Our deepest yearnings aren't something I'm trying to suppress, but temper with reason. Moderation is my goal here, that's where we seem to disagree.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Awakening a desire still doesn't mean it is necessarily good overall. By situation, perhaps, a passion is beneficial, but not in excess

I agree that not all desires are beneficial, yet I point out that they could not be exhausted by immortality. In other words, an immortal life might be more pleasant than you have supposed.

Our deepest yearnings aren't something I'm trying to suppress, but temper with reason. Moderation is my goal here, that's where we seem to disagree.

I don't wish to oppose moderation, but the question was whether living forever would be desirable. That it would, but it would probably be impossible. A story about Buddha occurs to me, that he could have vanished into nothing but instead remained in the world out of compassion for others. For me its hard to understand why he would be so willing to vanish unless he were suicidal, depressed and lacking emotion. If vanishing is so pleasant then why exist at all? If immortality is redundant, then what is the value of life?

 

[muichimotsu]

This assumes a hedonism focused philosophy where pleasure is the primary focus. Sure, we should strive to be happy, but we cannot always be that way in the fullest capacity. Also, knowledge is a good alongside pleasure, even if we can find pleasure in it, it is a good in itself as well, I'd argue.

Buddha in that perspective had a desire to aid others, which is admirable. The story also likely assumes that he became a bodhisattva.

Vanishing into nirvana doesn't have to be seen as negative if metaphysically, you're just becoming one with everything in a sense, even though your consciousness technically ceases to be. It's not pleasant or unpleasant, it's nirvana in a paradoxical sense. It's accepting things as they are and becoming at peace with all things, so you aren't trapped in the cycle of samsara.

Life is valuable because it is finite. We have to seek out pleasure, but also better the lives of others in the process of fulfilling our own desires. Even reincarnation or rebirth traps us in the sense that we still cling to finding something permanent, which is manifest in a desire for immortality, when you think about it.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Buddha in that perspective had a desire to aid others, which is admirable.

That is a good thing to point out. What is more admirable? Is it to live eternally and experience pleasure or to spend a short life helping others? If that is the choice than the latter is better. If you spend eternity but help no one but yourself, then there is nothing to admire about that choice assuming there is any such choice. If, on the other hand, you lived for eternity for the sake of helping others and solitude was the price you eventually paid, then that would be admirable. So in that case, too, immortality would be worthwhile, assuming you chose immortality for the sake of doing good. Choosing immortality for its own sake is of course not particularly admirable as you point out.

This assumes a hedonism focused philosophy where pleasure is the primary focus. Sure, we should strive to be happy, but we cannot always be that way in the fullest capacity.

I did not mean to give that impression but to point out the reality of the human situation. Our most admirable quality is compassion, but most things about us are not admirable. We are not spiritual beings, not lights, not ghosts chained to foul bodies. We are those foul bodies, only just realizing it and hoping to become something worthwhile. We eat food to produce crap, and other than compassion our best product is a child of good character. What more can a person hope for than to pass on something of value? Then you ask me if immortality would be worthwhile. Of course it would.

Also, knowledge is a good alongside pleasure, even if we can find pleasure in it, it is a good in itself as well, I'd argue.

Perhaps so, but it has no need of us and exists whether we know of it or not.

Vanishing into nirvana doesn't have to be seen as negative if metaphysically, you're just becoming one with everything in a sense, even though your consciousness technically ceases to be. It's not pleasant or unpleasant, it's nirvana in a paradoxical sense. It's accepting things as they are and becoming at peace with all things, so you aren't trapped in the cycle of samsara.

On some level a person is willing to accept that. A person can come close to accepting it, but the desire to be compassionate is a denial of it. If Nirvana is acceptable, then what is the benefit of compassion? So Nirvana is not an ideal in my opinion but a compromise. It is an acceptance of the state of our fragile and short existence, but compassion is something we hope will live on beyond us. Compassion is admirable but also at odds with our acceptance of our mortality. That is fine, because our minds are full of compromises and contradictions anyway. Its not a bad one to have.

Life is valuable because it is finite. We have to seek out pleasure, but also better the lives of others in the process of fulfilling our own desires. Even reincarnation or rebirth traps us in the sense that we still cling to finding something permanent, which is manifest in a desire for immortality, when you think about it.

I suspect that rebirth or reincarnation is what I was talking about in the previous paragraph but am not sure. Compassion could be thought of as a kind of rebirth, but its not bad for that to be the avenue through which we seek immortality. Life is valuable though, because it allows us to see the beauty of everything. Nothing else can see it. The rocks can't see themselves -- how hard and eternal they are. The stars don't know how bright they are, but we get to know for a brief moment.

 

[muichimotsu]

That is a good thing to point out. What is more admirable? Is it to live eternally and experience pleasure or to spend a short life helping others? If that is the choice than the latter is better. If you spend eternity but help no one but yourself, then there is nothing to admire about that choice assuming there is any such choice. If, on the other hand, you lived for eternity for the sake of helping others and solitude was the price you eventually paid, then that would be admirable. So in that case, too, immortality would be worthwhile, assuming you chose immortality for the sake of doing good. Choosing immortality for its own sake is of course not particularly admirable as you point out.

It'd be admirable in a way that few people can realistically act by that virtue. But the isolation is still an issue that I feel might imbalance the good you're doing for others in that you sacrifice any real possibility of happiness in the complete sense. Sure you could feel good about helping others, but you'd have no personal experiences connected directly to you that would constitute happiness for your sake even in the slightest. At least not a meaningful sense, esp. if you kept doing it.

I did not mean to give that impression but to point out the reality of the human situation. Our most admirable quality is compassion, but most things about us are not admirable. We are not spiritual beings, not lights, not ghosts chained to foul bodies. We are those foul bodies, only just realizing it and hoping to become something worthwhile. We eat food to produce crap, and other than compassion our best product is a child of good character. What more can a person hope for than to pass on something of value? Then you ask me if immortality would be worthwhile. Of course it would.

Passing on something would mean that you leave it behind, not that you continue to exist after you pass it on to someone, at least if we're talking about leaving an impression on the world.

Perhaps so, but it has no need of us and exists whether we know of it or not.

Not sure why you need to personify knowledge. Love doesn't have need, nor does desire, it's a function of our experience that is characterized as such in our attraction to things that we perceive as beneficial.

On some level a person is willing to accept that. A person can come close to accepting it, but the desire to be compassionate is a denial of it. If Nirvana is acceptable, then what is the benefit of compassion? So Nirvana is not an ideal in my opinion but a compromise. It is an acceptance of the state of our fragile and short existence, but compassion is something we hope will live on beyond us. Compassion is admirable but also at odds with our acceptance of our mortality. That is fine, because our minds are full of compromises and contradictions anyway. Its not a bad one to have.

Compassion is what leads to nirvana, especially as you cultivate it. It's not a compromise if the overall idea is that you attain it after much work, even rebirths in the supernatural Buddhist sense. Your compassion is meant to impact others and inspire them to imitate you in some sense. Compassion can be reconciled with accepting mortality in that you understand people are flawed and through their fear of death can behave in irrational ways.

I suspect that rebirth or reincarnation is what I was talking about in the previous paragraph but am not sure. Compassion could be thought of as a kind of rebirth, but its not bad for that to be the avenue through which we seek immortality. Life is valuable though, because it allows us to see the beauty of everything. Nothing else can see it. The rocks can't see themselves -- how hard and eternal they are. The stars don't know how bright they are, but we get to know for a brief moment.

Nirvana is supposedly meant to get out of rebirth/reincarnation (though the latter is arguably not part of technical Buddhist teaching). Seeking immortality through being remembered is something I can respect and that's what Buddha has in a sense, even if there might be some embellishment from his disciples over teh years.