This issue: Famous immortals throughout pop culture are discussed, and it leads to a discussion of what The Major Spoilers Crew would do if they were immortal.
[podcast]http://media.libsyn.com/media/majorspoilers/majorspoilers169.mp3[/podcast]Contact us at podcast@majorspoilers.com
A big Thank You goes out to everyone who downloads, subscribes, listens, and supports this show. We really appreciate you taking the time to listen to our ramblings each week. Tell your friends about the podcast, get them to subscribe and, be sure to visit the Major Spoilers site and forums.
5 Comments
I’m reminded of the episode of Star Trek Voyager “Death Wish”, it’s about a Q who wants to kill himself to force the Q continuum to face the unknown. At one point he explains how every Q has done everything possible in the universe at one point or another and that there is nothing left to do but die. “Captain, you’re an explorer, what would you do if there was nothing left to explore? would you like to live under those conditions?”
I’de live forever, but only under certain conditions which include a reset button so I can partialy erase my memory before insanity/depresion sets in. If not it gets to be just torture at some point.
One character I thought about was Flint. He was a character in an episode of the original Star Trek. He had been Brahms and DaVinci, but now simply wanted someone to love him that was as immortal as he was, so he built himself a fembot. Naturally, she fell for Kirk instead.
It’ interesting you mentioned Highlander, but only mentioned the films. While, Duncan from the TV Series, had his share of tragedies, he seemed more a part of life than Conner did. He got involved and tried to help people. He also didn’t go around changing his identity every few years.
You discussed the possibility of stopping the aging process at say, 70 years of age, (and decided that might not be very nice), but didn’t consider the possibility that if this happened you might then live long enough for science to reverse aging, thus granting you renewed youth. Just something to think about.
I believe that validates the point of the quality of life over the quantity. The appeal (if there is one) isn’t that our bodies will survive forever. It is that we can enjoy the process of living forever.
It is the same argument to be brought for the extreme elderly or terminally il and suffering. Some would argue that once the quality of life is permanently gone the biological act of living loses all value.
I believe this applies more to the mind than the body. One could be a 99 year old wheelchair-bound individual and still enjoy living every day. It is sharing the love of friends and family and feeling connected to the world that gives us prosperity.
The most difficult challenge comes in determining such things for those who are clinically brain dead or a victim of severe Alzheimer’s. The person others knew is gone whether the body remains or not.
So I believe the quality of an immortal life would determine whether it would be worth considering. Personally, I have no desire to outlive my children.
Just listened to this TED (Technology, Education and Design) Talk that deals specifically with extending quality and quantity of life. The speaker (Dan Buettner) states as a matter of fact that, as a species, we are only biologically able to extend life to about 100 years of age. Don’t know about the studies that prove this, but the statistical “Blue Zones” he talks about are kind of fascinating. Also fascinating are the characteristics they all share, whether they are in Sardinia, Okinawa, or Loma Linda, California.
Not exactly on topic, I know, but I think it ties into your quality/quantity of life questions.