[extropy-chat] ENOUGH again

[Mark Walker]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Broderick"


> And BTW2, McKibben is entirely clear in his wish to have us all die:
>
> `But you *can't* "enjoy the gift of life" forever. Maybe with these new
> tools you can *live* forever, but the joy of it--the meaning of it--will
> melt away like ice cream on an August afternoon. It is true that nothing
> short of these new technologies will make us immortal, but immortality is
a
> fool's goal. Living must be enougn for us, not living forever' (161).
>
> My notion of joy is a little less sticky than ice cream on an August
> afternoon, which is admittedly pleasant but not to die for, and I find
> McKibben's insight into the spiritual misery and existential emptiness of
> people 1000 years old entirely amazing. How can he *know* these things?
And
> how can he *know* that there will be no cure for the ailment he just
*knows*
> must afflict the optionally undying? I'm not saying he's wrong--I don't
know
> either. But his hubris in barring the gae in our face is breathtaking...
> literally.
>


What do you think McKibben means by 'living must be enough for us, not
living forever'? I agree that his epistemological credentials here must be
suspect since no one has lived 1000 years. Does the 'must' here suggest some
public policy recommendation, e.g., making it illegal to pursue immortality?
Or perhaps the point is simply that if we live this long we will be fools,
(in which case "stick and stones...")?

Mark

Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org