= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shminux comments on Over-applying rationality: Indefinite lifespans - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (14)
Most of the issues you raise have been debated here and elsewhere many times, yet you did not provide a single link. Either you did not bother familiarizing yourself with the current state of them, or you think thet you are the first one to come up with such ideas. Or maybe this OP is just a rant. None of those is a particularly good thing, so you get my downvote.
OK. Forgive my modest research skills. I've certainly seen lots of posts that assume that indefinite lifespans are a good thing, but I had never seen any that made contrary claims or rebutted such claims. I would welcome pointers to the best such discussions. It was not intended as a rant.
On LW, you can find discussions about the ethics and desirability of life extension in posts on cryonics. But it's also a well-established academic topic. Bostrom's papers on life extension are probably interesting to the LW crowd:
(Bostrom is, of course, an advocate for vastly extended lifespans. But he does give references to academic papers and popular writings with different conclusions.)
I think a literature review, rather than the current discussion post, would be much more appropriate.
My "On methusalahites" video attempts to explain the existence of those who prioritise living for a long time highly - which superficially appears to be a biological anomaly. Essentially, I invoke memetic hijacking.