If you could choose, would you want to live forever?
- March 13 · 6:30 PM
Would you want to live forever given a choice? Human life expectancy increases by 7 hours per day, every day. But even so, our average lifespan gives us 30,000 days total. On March 13th, in Marylebone Gardens, join fellow LPCers to learn and cheerfully debate about immortality.
Philosopher Stephen Cave will guide the evening, exploring with us four ways which have been tried since the beginning of time by hopefuls of all creeds and races to achieve immortality. He'll also present the case for adopting a philosophy that encourages us to look death in the eye.
NOTE: There will be a charge of £4 on the door, to cover room hire and transportation cost for Stephen. Doors open at 630 and Stephen will begin the discussion promptly at 7pm.
"An epic inquiry into the human desire to defy death – and how to overcome it." -- The Financial Times
"Fascinating." -- The Economist
"Immortality is a must-read exploration of what spurs human ingenuity... He presents an extremely compelling case - one that has changed my view of the driving force of civilisation as much as Jared Diamond did years ago with his brilliant book Guns, Germs and Steel." -- The New Scientist
About the speaker:
Stephen was born in Cornwall, in the beautiful but rainy Southwest of England, back in the days when Stevie Wonder and Steely Dan were topping the charts.
After a decade studying and teaching philosophy, he was awarded his PhD in metaphysics from the University of Cambridge in 2001. Before dedicating himself to writing, Stephen made ends meet working as a diplomat, negotiating international treaties on behalf of Her Majesty.
Stephen has since written essays, features and reviews on many philosophical, ethical and scientific subjects, from human nature to robot warriors and animal rights. He writes regularly for the Financial Times, and has also written for the New York Times, the Guardian, Wired and others. He has appeared on BBC Radio 3, BBC Radio 4, Deutschlandradio Kultur, Österreichischer Rundfunk and elsewhere.
His first book, Immortality: The Quest to Live Forever and How It Drives Civilization, was published in English and other languages in spring 2012. Stephen lives in Berlin with his wife, the journalist Friederike von Tiesenhausen, and their many daughters. He speaks fluent German.
-
Acharya Kamaleshvaranand
Human beings want to live dignified lives;
Human beings have to earn their livelihood and perform their assigned duties. The degree of physical labour they have to perform depends on the economic condition of their land. The citizens of those countries, which are socio-economically developed, have to perform less physical labour; instead their intellectual labour has increased. This is the natural law.
“While living a life charged with action, one should pray to live for one hundred years, only to continue performing noble deeds.”April 25
-
Nicholas
This is one of those 'antigravity' questions. The problem is that if gravity were switched off we've no idea where we would end up, and if there had never been gravity, we couldn't exist anyway. Each of us has an unbroken lineage all the way back to the first RNA molecule. If those ancestors had not died, we could not be alive. If we lived for ever, we would effectively be killing our descendants. Having said that, 30,000 days really isn't enough. Have the older ones among you found, as you have aged, how the random walk of history grows in relation to the revolutionary thrust you believed in when young? That's not to say there should not be revolution, but it should be incited from a position of understanding consequences, most of which will be unintended. It's no coincidence that science fiction is by and large more about time than space. Things are getting better as now we have access to more information about the past than ever before, but what we lack is time to make sense of it.
April 24
-
kevin o'connor
The book I mentioned at the talk which proves life after death is called
Proof of heaven by
Dr Eben Alexander
published by Simon and Schuster1 · March 15
-
-
Ollie Hoad
Thanks for sharing Kevin. Have you read Raymond A. Moody's Life After Life? A very interesting study into near death experiences.
March 18
-
-
Anna J
Mark I agree, our group focused completely on the definition of existence and the complications and consequences. I don't think any of us came with a solid answer, I think all of us left even more uncertainty! It was a brilliant question for such an evening because of the lack of definition and context! Looking forward to the next one
1 · March 14
-
Mark
This was my first event in this group. I thought it was good! The presentation was interesting, as was the group discussion I was involved in.
Regarding the subject matter, the focus was more on whether it's possible to live forever rather than whether we would want to live forever (which is the question posed by the title of the event). Personally, I find the prospect of existing into the infinite future rather disturbing. But on the other hand I find the prospect of non-existence disturbing, possibly more so. So... I don't really know whether I'd want to live forever! To answer that question, I'd need to know the true explanation of existence. If it is the explanation offered by naturalism, then I think I'd say no. Eighty years of an objectively meaningless existence is perhaps bearable, but an eternity of it would surely be horrendous!
Anyway, thanks for setting this up! :)
2 · March 14
-
Paul Adnitt
Really enjoyed the evening; the speaker and table conversation were very interesting.
Filip - The group is great, and I like the flexibility, though maybe a little more Q&A time could've been squeezed in. It would've been nice to get a bit more engagement with him. But it's only a minor point. Keep up the good work!
1 · March 14
-
-
Filip Matous
Fair enough and thanks for coming - I will try to be clearer next time. I probably didn't communicate well that the group session might not have a finale. I ended the Q&A after 20mins as the venue was allowing us to use it for one purpose - to buy drinks. We don't meet the bar tab and I end up paying out of my own pocket. Also the speaker was unpaid and had expressed that he couldn't stay too long.
March 14
-
-
lucien simon
I didn't get too much from it and pondered most points the speaker made before. However, it was dissapointing the speaker
Left early, no closing speach, no engagement etc, very poor indeed.March 14
-
-
Filip Matous
Hi Lucien, sad to hear the event sucked for you. RE him leaving early, please see my response to Lawrence.
Regards,
FilipMarch 14
-
-
-
-
-
Elin Moe
Really interesting topic and a good speaker, which created a good conversation around our table. I wish we would have been the promised closing speech/discussion at the end though.
March 14
-
-
-
-
-
-
Chris Cooper
" Immortality" would be fine provided one had a healthy and fairly youthful body. But "immortal"doesn't mean"eternal". If a train train cuts me in half,I don't want to be everlasting. So"immortal" really means "not dying of disease or ageing, just of violence or accident. Hence a life of no fixed term."
March 12
-
-
-
Carmel Proctor
I would really love to come to this but I'm joining a choir that evening instead.
March 11
-
-
-
David Wood
This meeting looks really interesting (and the book by Stephen Cave is well worth reading), but there's a competing event this evening that is even more interesting, regrettably!
March 8
-
Carmel Proctor
My plan is to live to 115 years, bujt I may change my mind about that when I'm 114 1/2.
2 · March 7
-
-
Karen
an interesting article posted by the school of life which says we all desire immortality http://rationalist.org.uk/artic...
1 · March 4
-
-
-
Hanna
I really want to come. However, i finish work late so I'm not sure i will make it on time. Just wonder if they close the doors or something or if it is worth a try
February 26
-
Filip Matous
Hi Hanna, do come, the venue this time should be ok if you are late. Hopefully you get to catch some of Stephen's talk. Best, Filip
February 26
-
Elisa
I wouldn't mind living forever if I could abandon my physical body and continue on as a spirit.
February 12
-
-
David Wood
The possibility to "abandon your physical body and continue on as a spirit" may be within the grasp of technology in the next 20-50 years - due to "mind uploading" (copying human minds into a new computer).
Personally, I think I'd be quite happy to keep living in my physical body, with that body being improved and augmented to address its present shortcomings. (The first step was having my eyes lasered a few years back.)
February 12
-
-
Andreina Perez
I was thinking to come but the question sounds now like a master bullying it's muppet :p
February 12
-
-
-
Matthew Wilson
"The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive."
- Private Joker, Full Metal Jacket
February 12
-
Yissar
I would like to say that even doubling the current life span will lead to many changes.
For example, people will be able to have a family with kids and grandkids and then will have enough time to go on starting over another family and/or having a long career in one area and another one (or more) in a completely different area.
These are just 2 examples which IMHO will lead to many changes and will require social adjustments.
Living for long time than we used to will require changing our mind set.February 12
-
Luis Ramos
I actually want to die, now. I mean forever.
What is forever anyway? I mean, 'what is ''to choose?''' :-)February 12
-
-
David Wood
>I actually want to die, now
I sincerely hope that neither I, nor anyone I care for, will say "I actually want to die, now" whilst there are still great books to read, wonderful pieces of music to discover and enjoy, captivating films to watch, enchanting places to explore (including vast numbers of exosolar planets), fascinating fields of science and mathematics to learn about, exciting sports to experience, and inspiring people to get to know and spend time with...
February 12
-
-
David Wood
Asking for immortality makes the discussion extreme. Why not focus instead on enabling people to keep on living as long as they wish, with maximum health and vitality?
To those that say that the earth doesn't have the resources to enable this, we should consider the arguments such as in the book "Abundance" - the sun is the source of ample energy for all our needs, once we develop the technology to capture it. The scientific advances that yield significant life extension are likely to be paralleled by advances that yield significantly better energy capture and the creation of ample new materials.
3 · February 11
-
surose
have thought about this question and there is a lot i could say on this topic but think will wait until the event
February 11
-
Simon Attwood
The conflict is that, organically, we are geared towards survival and survival means a constant battle against death. Yet rationally we know that immortality is not only ludicrous but also highly dysfunctional as we are already stripping this planet of life at our rate of expansion. It appears that the balance favours the former. In other words we are more driven by our organic needs than our rational ones, otherwise we would have the good sense to curb our expansion and understand that the economic ideal of growth is a suicidal path. Or as David Attenborough put it;
February 11
-
Baldip Kaur
Absolutly not! as it is impossible do not want to waste energy thinking about it.... but good to know what everybody thinks
February 11
-
-
-
-
-
-
A former member
...yes, assuming we are all spared till then - ...! anyone else read Ursula Le Guin's The Farthest Shore on the subject?
February 11
-
People in thisMeetup are also in:
-
-
-
The London Cultureseekers Group - Meet People in London!
9,362 Cultureseekers
Next Meetup:
Saturday, May 25 -
-
-
Join or login to comment.