Why is it that people die?

[devonin]

Originally Posted by Chief0678

Well, that is true.

I deny that that is true. If you lived forever, why would there be a biological directive to procreate, let alone frequently? I suspect rather that childbirth would become strictly regulated to ensure overpopulation didn't occur (IE. new children would only be authorized as people died of unnatural casues [Since we're not talking about invulnerability, only immortality, you could still be killed even if you would never die naturally] or new land capable of supporting human life was found) and there would be many advances in the technologies of birth control and abortion.

[Vendetta21]

One problem here is that if we made it so humans could live forever by stopping cell failure, according to our current knowledge on the process, we would thus be making it so we are highly susceptible to cancer as the process which limits the number of times a cell can divide is believed to be one of the same processes which helps prevent cancer. There is a strand on the DNA that is shortened every time a cell replicates, I don't remember what it's called, but tetsudines (turtles, terrapins, and tortoises) all have it so when their cells replicate this strand isn't shortened. It's like teromere or something (the strand).

Anyways, tetsudines organs don't deteriorate like ours do. Organs that are self-reproducing such as stomach, liver, kidneys are in the same condition in a 180 year old tetsudine as they are in a 20 year old tetsudine.

With stem-cells, cells which can effectively take the place of any cell and act as brand new version, and a medical procedure which stops the shortening of teromere (teromene?) you could prolong the life humans significantly, but without a cure for cancer humans would still die when their luck ran out.

Assuming there was a cure for cancer, brain deterioration would still occur because when a brain cell is damaged or destroyed it cannot be replaced, and all humans would be on a road to the eventual death of the brain. I'm not aware of any ways to reverse the loss of brain cells. And however slowly, in regular human life we kill brain cells daily. That and certain things we do rapidly kill brain cells. (drinking)

I think at the very best we could slow the coming of death down significantly to the point where we may live hundreds of years, but I don't think we could make it altogether inevitable.

Then again I'm no expert and I hardly know what I'm talking about.

[TI_Virus]

Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time.

[frank34443]

I think most of it has been said already. But with a topic like this it is quite hard not to bring up the fact that humans are supposed to die. No one can live forever and its only natural. Sure, life can be increased by using medicines, new developing technologies and the like, but like said a few times before death is unavoidable. Just like living, dying is natural.

[TheChosenOneJr]

I'll just say that we weren't meant to live forever as one thing, as I am a firm believer in the after-life (so called 'heaven' or 'hell') and that ofcourse, GOD has made it where cells will wear out in a given period of time, normally, and that we can live the right amount of time before the time comes and that living forever would just mean that it would leave GOD in a lonely state without you, because according to religion, God doesn't interact with you as much as he does in heaven. That's just opinionated.

Scientifically, there will never be a way to extend cell life to forever, there isn't such thing as a cell-life extender, but a shortener there is. Not all things have reverses, such as death, you can't be brought back to life, that's the meaning of sex, which your next life isn't your own, where as this means that your life isn't your own, but are of the first 2 human beings to cease in existance. It's not that hard, but it's not easy avoiding the fact that all these points all point back to GOD and stuff. It's a real big deal in life/death.

If you want to know more about my religion, PM me, I'll give the briefest explaination as possible on the spot.


EDIT: I am not completely sure if EVERYTHING I say is 100% accurate, there may be tiny flaws, much of this comes from my own logic of reasoning, it's bias and true at the same time, just don't criticize too much, I'm not stupid, just under-educated.

Originally Posted by Vendetta21

Then again I'm no expert and I hardly know what I'm talking about.

same here

[FreezinIce]

Hit me with a sharp object if someone already alluded to/said this, because I didnt read all the posts (Yeah im a terrible person , also whats the cutoff point for posting on old topics?) Also the angle im going on with this is the [non-religeous view]

Living in its very definition is done with the understanding that the period of time in which you "live" is finite. When you learn how to become immortal, you cease to live and simply exist. Now im not saying that you lose you soul, you become dead inside, ect. but if you think about the definition of "to live", it seems inherent that life eventually ends, coming from millions of years of life ending with no exception to that "absolute" law. So "living forever" is actually an oxymoron, since those two words are virtually opposite. Existing forever is a more accurate term.

I think in some way our body runs like the mileage on a car, but can't be reset.

[devonin]

Originally Posted by FreezinIce

Hit me with a sharp object if someone already alluded to/said this, because I didnt read all the posts (Yeah im a terrible person , also whats the cutoff point for posting on old topics?) Also the angle im going on with this is the [non-religeous view]

No need to hit you, though you ought to read the whole thread before posting, especially if its a bump of more than a week or so. There isn't actually a cut-off for posting in old topics in CT as long as your post is worth making.

Living in its very definition is done with the understanding that the period of time in which you "live" is finite. When you learn how to become immortal, you cease to live and simply exist.

Er...I disagree that the term "to live" necessarily includes an eventual ending to that life. In fact, the only distinction between "living" and "existing" that I'm aware of is one that is actually a fairly religious view, wherein you would argue that to merely exist is to have an empty life, where you have nothing to motivate you, nothing to make you happy, and essentially nothing to live "for"

I don't see how immortality would remove that quality from ones life. You would constantly be able to move on to new things that interest you, to expand your knowledge, your interests, in fact it sounds like a pretty -nice- life to me.

Now im not saying that you lose you soul, you become dead inside, ect. but if you think about the definition of "to live", it seems inherent that life eventually ends, coming from millions of years of life ending with no exception to that "absolute" law.

Just because all lives appear to have ended in the past doesn't mean that all lives must end in order to become lives.

This suggests a very "Judge no man's life until he is dead" approach that while it works from a "living the good life" philosophical standpoint, doesn't actually create a hard and fast rule. The suggestion is that you cannot properly judge the quality of someone's life until they are dead, because there is still time for the quality of their life to change otherwise, but there is no compelling reason to even accept that logic, let alone extend it to force the definition of "being alive" to include "Must die"

So "living forever" is actually an oxymoron, since those two words are virtually opposite. Existing forever is a more accurate term.

From the standpoint of simply looking at the definition of the words, life and existance actually mean very close to the exact same thing. The distinction between "Living your life" and "Simply existing" is a social one, almost more of a psychological one. To only exist is a term people tend to use when they are depressed, or lonely, or so busy that they have no time for their own wants, only the satisfaction of their needs. I don't see that as any way incompatible with immortality. You could live forever, or exist forever, or spend some centuries living, and some merely existing, but I just can't agree that life cannot extend over any duration.

Here's a question for you: Currently, you have not died. Are you alive? Or are you merely existing? You -assume- that because many lives before you have ended, yours will as well. But what if you are incorrect? What if you are, in fact, immortal? How many years do you have to be "alive" before you magically switch to just "existing"?

[zadovoljna]

Death is bound to happen and if for some reason modern technology could find a way to sustain cells from dying, there would be a constant maintenance to keep our body alive (in my opinion) because the older you get the sicker you get and you also have more accidents because you lived longer. Let's say you have this "new technology" to keep cells alive forever. Ok, but then wouldn't that mean that they would have to find a way to keep every individual component in your body alive some how? Now your body will never die as one whole component, but rather you have smaller components dying, like a kidney or whatever. You would need a transplant. I understand that cells divide to make things up, but don't cells know what they are going to eventually turn into? So maybe I wasn't paying attention in my biology class but wouldn't they need to know exactly what cell is multiplying to make what up? And if that is the case an answer to immortality would take a very long time to find because you would need to know how to make each individual component of the body up in order to stay alive. Correct me if I'm wrong...

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Well I think we're getting close. When I was in South Carolina about 5 years ago, there was this commercial for a product called Youth ****tail. I was too young to absorb all of the scientific information, but according to the cm, cell breakdown is primarily caused by the obstruction of intracellular transport (i.e. endoplasmic constriction). By preventing the molecular irregularities by supplying a certain molecule (that i forget) the cells' respiration lengths increased by 30%. I don't remember much else about the product, but the cm guaranteed definite life spans of 110 years of age. I sort of think this is phony in many aspects of the given information, but the scientific reason for cell destruction is quite accurate.

First time I visited a sophisticated people's thread. Intriguing.

[FreezinIce]

I see. Well I wasnt trying to imply that existing is any lower on the scale than living, but I see your point. Life is the state of you living and breathing, and ends only when those functions cease. And I agree with you, finding the cutoff point to where you life ends and your state of existing begins in my senario would be impossible. I guess existance is limited to innanimate objects and extremely depressed people

[slipstrike0159]

Im pretty sure the psycological point of view hasnt been discussed yet.
While its been fairly well established that the physical body can only endure so much without constant rejuvenation or repair on almost every cell needed to live, we havent taken into consideration the psycological drama associated with living so long.
Even though it may at some point be possible to keep cells alive longer, i find it fairly impossible to keep yourself from going insane (for lack of better phrasing). To put it vary simply, we will eventually not care to live anymore after a certain length of time. Either the will to live will be gone and you would have to forcibly be kept alive through every physical problem or suicide would come into play. Think about the constant pounding of information, dramatic events, etc. that take quite a toll on your mental endurance. The point is that you cant make someone want to live through science or medication (leaving out brainwashing of course).

[devonin]

That's a valid enough point Slipstrike, but bear in mind that when we say immortality, we don't include invulnerability. Think of it more like eternal youth. You can still be killed, you can still kill yourself. You just can't die of "natural causes"

Along with the increased emphasis on birth control/abortion etc to control the population that can functionally live forever barring accidents and crime, there would obviously also be a great deal of emphasis placed on developing methods of euthanisia for those as no longer want to go on living.

I don't necessarily see this as a fundamental problem with living forever, so much as a shift from "Things to make you look/feel young" to "Things to make you able to want to go on living."

[slipstrike0159]

Originally Posted by devonin

That's a valid enough point Slipstrike, but bear in mind that when we say immortality, we don't include invulnerability. Think of it more like eternal youth. You can still be killed, you can still kill yourself. You just can't die of "natural causes"

Hmmm... i now realise i wasnt very clear in my thought process.
What i meant it to say was that if we had such the technology to keep a persons cells and organs alive after the trama of just going through life, then surely we would be able to keep someone alive after a massive devestating act against the body such as getting shot. However it would still be possible to die, medical procedures would surely be advanced enough to keep someone alive under the most strenuous procedures. In such a case you would be so sick of living after living a set number of years, suicide would become something serious to think about. So in a sense, you would go insane from living too long.

[devonin]

I don't know that you'd necessarily go insane. The entire strength of the survival instinct in humanity comes from the fact that our lives are finite, and easily ended. If we didn't have such a drive to accomplish as many things as possible in as quick a time as possible, due to the knowledge of our imminent death from age if nothing else, I rather suspect we would take more care and time with our pursuits, and not run out of things to want to do quite so quickly.

[Tyren]

I agree devonin, but i dont believe due to the lack of a finite timeline the human being will fail to become desensitized to stimuli. In such an instance we effectively become numb to the things which an individual who does have a finite lifespan hold in such high regard. The pursuits that we do follow through with will likely be exceedingly more drastic. I assume murder and suicide will be placed upon a certain pedal, far higher then it is now. Which also leads me to believe that morality will be escalated and securities will be increased, effectively asphyxiating certain freedoms that we as finite beings hold so strongly to. Essentially an individual will become overly sensitive to death knowing that his life can not be ended unless by the will of another. It is without a doubt in my mind that existence will lose its sweet appeal as of such.

[sexyinpink]

This is really, really stupid. The body gets tired of living, your heart muscles get enough of pumping blood, everything gets old and eventually gives up and dies. We all die, face it

[Go_Oilers_Go]

Blame it on the Grim Reaper.

[devonin]

Originally Posted by sexyinpink

This is really, really stupid.

This is not a phrase that should ever appear in Critical Thinking. Please refrain from using it.

The body gets tired of living, your heart muscles get enough of pumping blood, everything gets old and eventually gives up and dies. We all die, face it

Yes, actually reading the thread before posting would have indicated that we'd already discussed the biological issues with the concept of immortality. The discussion naturally assumes that the -way- we're extending lives in this question, is through the development of techniques to stop these problems from arising.

Originally Posted by Go_Oilers_Go

Blame it on the Grim Reaper.

I'm pretty sure that anthropomorphic personifications don't have much to do with the discussion at hand *grin*