Would be willing to be forever young?

[Scarlet Knight]

So basically, we'd be elves. Things will still kill us, we will live longer as our bodies stay heathy longer, & we can still learn over time with the sharpness of youth.

But I wonder how it would go if the whole family doesn't do it together? Imagine a man or woman with the body/hormones of 30 with a spouse of 70? Or a 30 year old with 50 year old children? It goes poorly with May/ december marriages.

I'm not sure; I'd love to have a young body but I see so many minefields.

[Frozen_Feet]

However, like the proverbial frog in the pot of boiling water, your personality changes so slowly that it *feels* like one continuous existence. I'm pretty sure I'm not the same person I was 25 years ago, but I can look back at memories of that time and know that it's me doing them. The same could not be said of my children, should I ever have any.

You're not wrong, but obviously as someone who is skeptical of the concept of self, I do not place much weight on the subjective feeling of continuity of self. That's before we get to particulars of how human memory works - once enough time has passed, it's dubious if your memories will have anything at all to do with what actually happened.

[Ravens_cry]

Can modifications to my body still 'take'? Like, if I were to get implants and other feminization surgeries and SRS, would my body try to revert to 'factory settings'? Heck, can I get my ears pierced.
Eh, probably still would. I've always wanted to see more of the Story. I want to see what we humans do with space travel.

[Frozen_Feet]

Not aging does not imply magic regeneration powers, so it wouldn't get in the way of body modification. The flipside of this is that since some tissues plain do not renew themselves very well, you'd eventually lose your teeth, become infertile etc. despite otherwise being young and healthy.

There was a Finnish science fiction story, released in either Tähtivaeltaja or Portti, which explored this concept quite far.

[sktarq]

Ummmm....yes. . . In a heartbeat. I am too curious about the world and "what's next" to have issues with it for myself.

[Karmea]

Totally. Gimme.

There's a lot of stuff I like about the world and lot of stuff I haven't yet tried. I'd also like to see space travel. Too bad you gotta die at some point, but hey, even an extended lifespan at the prime of youth is really nice.

[Amazon]

Can modifications to my body still 'take'? Like, if I were to get implants and other feminization surgeries and SRS, would my body try to revert to 'factory settings'? Heck, can I get my ears pierced.
Eh, probably still would. I've always wanted to see more of the Story. I want to see what we humans do with space travel.

Ironically this whole scenario was created by me as though experiment in my campus to illustrate how transphobic folks are hypocrites.

[Florian]

Ironically this whole scenario was created by me as though experiment in my campus to illustrate how transphobic folks are hypocrites.

You basically failed then.

[Amazon]

You basically failed then.

Not really, it was a huge success actually, I'm not sure if I changed the mind of all bigots in the room but they didn't had any witty come back(As they usually do -_-) and they got out of the panel with a "Hun..." puzzled look at their faces.

It was tons of fun. ^^

[Florian]

Not really, it was a huge success actually, I'm not sure if I changed the mind of all bigots in the room but they didn't had any witty come back(As they usually do -_-) and they got out of the panel with a "Hun..." puzzled look at their faces.

It was tons of fun. ^^

Contextually, you still asked the wrong question, therefore you come to the wrong conclusions.

[Liquor Box]

Still no. The problem with aging is the accumulated wear and tear on your body, also that every hurt you ever received will sum up with time. I'm rather 80 and look and feel like 80, then look like 20 with the accumulated hurt of someone who is 80.

I don't think Amazon's suggestion precludes wounds healing.

[Liquor Box]

So basically, we'd be elves. Things will still kill us, we will live longer as our bodies stay heathy longer, & we can still learn over time with the sharpness of youth.

Except not lame like elves.


Outside of the benefit of looking and feeling good forever yourself, another benefit of the forever young pill, if lots of people took it is that the pool of other people who are attractive would be greater.

[Amazon]

Contextually, you still asked the wrong question, therefore you come to the wrong conclusions.

I'm sorry you sir you are the one with the wrong assumptions, I said the scenario originated with that premise in mind, not my post in here, you know nothing about my presentation so shut up.

Anyway, I really liked the idea and wanted to explore this forum ideas and opinions on the consequences and implications of this imaginary situation further.

I’m also intrigued with the concept of maturity being a consequence of aging or just experience; can someone with a young mind and set of hormones really achieve the experience and wisdom of an old sage? Or does the experience of getting old itself makes one wiser? What you guys think?

[Tvtyrant]

Pretty much on the no train. Immortality is essentially the end of development, in every meaningful sense of the word. Imagine Galileo trying to overcome the authority of Aristotle to his face, or the world being cut up by the Chin Emperor and Augustus.

[AMFV]

Ironically this whole scenario was created by me as though experiment in my campus to illustrate how transphobic folks are hypocrites.

I'm not entirely sure I see the comparison point between living forever (or being youthful until death) and SRS. Maybe if you could go into some detail on why you thought it was a good analogy or what the points in your presentation were. It's also worth noting that college campus' are not always the best place to present this sort of analogy because certain ideological points are en vogue and therefore are likely subjected to a lower degree of certainty.

So in what sense do you think that being able to make yourself young is comparable to being able to change your physical gender to match what your internalized gender is? Cause I don't see a strong comparison point.

{Note - snipped and paragraphs rearranged for response clarity}
I’m also intrigued with the concept of maturity being a consequence of aging or just experience; can someone with a young mind and set of hormones really achieve the experience and wisdom of an old sage? Or does the experience of getting old itself makes one wiser? What you guys think?

There are a few important notes here:

As far as hormones go... the hormones that have the biggest shift with age are the sexual ones, Estrogen and Testosterone basically. So my question is are you arguing that high levels of either makes a person inherently less wise? If that is the case how do you explain how men from third world countries are often considered to be the most wise or sagelike, when their testosterone levels shift less (almost not at all) as compared to men from our own first world experience?

Also if this is about hormones, wouldn't asking guys if they would be willing to take steroids to improve themselves be a better way to highlight that particular hypocrisy?

I think that in the end, being wise comes from having experienced things. I've met plenty of old people who were NOT wise, and plenty of young people who had rough lives and had to become wiser earlier in order to make it. So I don't think there's any strong correlation between age and wisdom, the only relationship is that people who are older are more likely to have had more experiences and therefore be wiser.

Anyway, I really liked the idea and wanted to explore this forum ideas and opinions on the consequences and implications of this imaginary situation further.

Alrighty then my answer depends on a couple of factors that aren't fully explored in the OP:

Scenario 1: I can stay young as can my loved ones, this treatment works on everybody equally even the very old.

In this case I would probably do it, the chance to keep doing the kind of physical things I love for longer would certainly be worth it, I could work at my job longer, and keep lifting weights at a higher level for much longer.

Scenario 2: Only I remain young.

Nope

Scenario 3: I remain young but can't develop and the same other conditions as Sc. 1

Nope

Scenario 4: It actually translates to living forever.

Nope.

Also this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1TcDHrkQYg

[Amazon]

I'm not entirely sure I see the comparison point between living forever (or being youthful until death) and SRS. Maybe if you could go into some detail on why you thought it was a good analogy or what the points in your presentation were. It's also worth noting that college campus' are not always the best place to present this sort of analogy because certain ideological points are en vogue and therefore are likely subjected to a lower degree of certainty.

So in what sense do you think that being able to make yourself young is comparable to being able to change your physical gender to match what your internalized gender is? Cause I don't see a strong comparison point.

I could go into some detail but I think I won't since this is not the same context, it was spoiled and it won't be as effective, and I don't want you guys talking bs on my project. So I probably won't do it.

But the basic idea is that they both consist in using technology as a form of changing a fundamental aspect of yourself with the intention of providing a more comfortable and happy existence.

Early on I asked the groups on which ways science or technology were used to improve their immediate lives or altered some aspects of their physiology.

One of the students (Who is an alternative right member btw) listed his use of glasses for example, other the use of medicines etc...

And then the conclusion was that humans have been altering themselves with whatever technology provided since the earliest days of civilization. Tools, clothing, armor, and weapons are all ways that mankind has altered itself to be better suited to its environment. Just because our tools now allow us to modify the most fundamental part of our being permanently does not make these tools any less useful or any less ethical.

If someone (Such as many students preset in the panel) consider trans folks to be against the natural order but are in favor of using technology that prolonged their life spans to unnatural levels, they are hypocrites.

[AMFV]

I could go into some detail but I think I won't since this is not the same context, it was spoiled and it won't be as effective, and I don't want you guys talking bs on my project. So I probably won't do it.

Well your project was already successful by your own admission, so if we talk crap on it there's no negative impact to you, and you can maybe learn things that would be useful in the next project. And there's a strong likelihood that we wouldn't. I mean I think that most of the folks here tend to be pretty understanding or at least try to be. Like the attitude regarding your analogy was mostly puzzlement initially until you started to get cagey and defensive instead of answering questions about it.

But the basic idea is that they both consist in using technology as a form of changing a fundamental aspect of yourself with the intention of providing a more comfortable and happy existence.

Well I think the thing you're going to find out is that people don't consider their age to be a fundamental aspect of themselves in the same that people who are opposed to SRS would consider gender to a fundamental part of the self. Age has always been something we've fought against in terms of it's ravages. Also notably your argument WOULD NOT prevent people from aging, only from the physical ravages of time, unless of course you spelled that differently in your presentation then you have here.

Early on I asked the groups on which ways science or technology were used to improve their immediate lives or altered some aspects of their physiology.

One of the students (Who is an alternative right member btw) listed his use of glasses for example, other the use of medicines etc...

Like an admitted member of the Alt-Right? Like a member of the ANP or something? Or like somebody who is libertarian? Cause if he is not an actual Nazi you shouldn't be calling him that on a public forum, or calling him something that people think is equivalent to that. And the only grounds you'd have to fairly call somebody that is by admission, not by your inference.

And again, being nearsighted is a fundamental part of somebody's identity generally. A medical problem is not equivalent to SRS without a lot of hemming and hawing to make it work. Like if I fall at work and I break my arm and I later have corrective surgery to fix that... it's not changing who I fundamentally am, it's just surgery. The issue is that many people believe that SRS is not the correct action to take to make a transperson happy, and that it's basically encouraging somebody with a set of mental delusions, I don't know how I feel about this, I have no strong opinions, but for it to be the hypocrisy you're arguing you have to make inferences about their philosophical stances... inferences that have not been supported by any conservative person I've talked to, and I have a lot of conservative friends.

And then the conclusion was that humans have been altering themselves with whatever technology provided since the earliest days of civilization. Tools, clothing, armor, and weapons are all ways that mankind has altered itself to be better suited to its environment. Just because our tools now allow us to modify the most fundamental part of our being permanently does not make these tools any less useful or any less ethical.

Well, again, it depends on your ethical framework. Period. And you're inferring theirs, and I've never seen the particular set of objections you're claiming are the common set raised.

If someone (Such as many students preset in the panel) consider trans folks to be against the natural order but are in favor of using technology that prolonged their life spans to unnatural levels, they are hypocrites.

Well it depends on the specific reasoning behind their objections and on their specific moral philosophical set-up if they are hypocrites or not.


In any case I'd be a lot more interested in discussing the aging and hormones thing, than the potential flaws in your analogy thing. Since one is likely to be productive and interesting, and the other is likely to convince nobody and be just frustrating for you, and I as well.

[Liquor Box]

I think it is a reasonable analogy myself. If you object to sex change on the basis that it is not what nature intended, then why would you not object having an artificially younger physiology?

But like any analogy, it falls short if someone points out a relevant distinction. AMFV has suggested the two states can be distinguished because gender is more essential to the sense of self than age. I wonder if some trans people might object to this analogy on the basis that they think of themselves as actually becoming their new gender (ie, a trans woman is a woman) while a 60 year old who technology has altered to have the body of a 20 year old, would still be sixty years old - they don't become young, they just imitate youth.

It also only addresses objections to gender change on the basis of what is natural. If someone objects to gender change (or holds other views that might be considered anti-trans) for different reasons, this analogy wouldn't address it.

So, an interesting though exercise/analogy, which might cause some people who object to gender change to have another look at their beliefs, but somewhat limited, and not sufficient to say people are hypocrites I don't think.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

If someone (Such as many students preset in the panel) consider trans folks to be against the natural order but are in favor of using technology that prolonged their life spans to unnatural levels, they are hypocrites.

Your conclusion relies on an assumption that you have not proven: that transphobia is based on dislike of body modification. The more generally accepted view is that transphobia is rooted in sexism: the belief that humans can only be classified as men or woman, that the two are different, and that men are superior to women. The existence of trans people is one of the many ways that reveals this picture to be a ridiculous simplification of reality, which is why they hate and fear them.

The willingness of transphobes to use technology to improve their bodies does not enter into this, since it does not disturb their simplified binary outlook, and thus cannot be classified as hypocrisy.

I think it is a reasonable analogy myself. If you object to sex change on the basis that it is not what nature intended, then why would you not object having an artificially younger physiology?

But that's not the usual "argument"* wielded by transphobes. As per the above, what's unnatural is for men to act, behave or in any other way be "like women". It's the same "argument"* wielded against non-heterosexuals, and indeed against anyone not willing to toe the line on the patriarchal world order.

Grey Wolf

*I'm using this word quite wrongly, of course

[S@tanicoaldo]

I could work at my job longer, and keep lifting weights at a higher level for much longer.[/I]

Really? I mean I don't want to judge but with the whole world out there and in this specific scenario interplanetary travel and you pick working for a longer time and lifting weights as a way to spend your eternal youth?

Are some kind of toilet paper mascot or something?

Pretty much on the no train. Immortality is essentially the end of development, in every meaningful sense of the word. Imagine Galileo trying to overcome the authority of Aristotle to his face, or the world being cut up by the Chin Emperor and Augustus.

It has been covered, this is not about immortality.

I’m also intrigued with the concept of maturity being a consequence of aging or just experience; can someone with a young mind and set of hormones really achieve the experience and wisdom of an old sage? Or does the experience of getting old itself makes one wiser? What you guys think?

I personally don't think so, it's hard to be wise when all you can think about is cute boys and hunky dudes, you can’t mediate on the fundamental structures of the universe if you are sad because of your last breakup.

[Liquor Box]

But that's not the usual "argument"* wielded by transphobes. As per the above, what's unnatural is for men to act, behave or in any other way be "like women". It's the same "argument"* wielded against non-heterosexuals, and indeed against anyone not willing to toe the line on the patriarchal world order.

Grey Wolf

*I'm using this word quite wrongly, of course

I'm not sure I agree that there is any sort of consensus that transphobia is rooted is sexism, and "it's not natural" is a common (if not most common) argument against gender-reassignment. But, you are right that it doesn't apply to people who object to gender reassignment on different grounds, as I said in the third paragraph of my post.

[Amazon]

Urrrg.. I knew this would happen I should never have open my huge mouth, I just wanted this gender thing to be a side note, not ruin the whole thread.

Anyway this whole thing was made as a response to a series of presentations; the biology department is making a whole symposium about ethics and bio-technology.

A stupid biologist wrote a controversial book about how nature has a natural order and that his observation of hybrids made him conclude that such thing is real, something about mules being sterile or something. And things such as trans people are going agiants the antural order of nature.

Another biologist made a panel about how sexuality and gender in nature are complex and non-binary, and that can be observed in many species of animals.

A group of jerks made a panel about how such changes are natural occurrences and don't need expensive and invasive chirurgical procedures to change, which gave me to make my own panel about transhumanism.

All that and we are not really allowed to make response panels, we are big on the passive aggressive academia on my university

So yeah I know that's not the only or main factor on trasphobia, it just happen to be a topic everyone was talking about at the time. And the thing was never about transphobia it was about how valid such changes are.

[AMFV]

Really? I mean I don't want to judge but with the whole world out there and in this specific scenario interplanetary travel and you pick working for a longer time and lifting weights as a way to spend your eternal youth?

I love my job, like I really love my job. The fact that when I get older I'll have to stop doing it is deeply frustrating to me. So the idea that I might be able to be involved in something that I love for a longer period is profoundly amazing to me. I mean I make things that will live for years, sometimes even for hundreds of years. How could that not make you happy. What else would you want to do with staying young?

As far as lifting weights goes. I love that also. The fact that at some point I will stop improving and then start barely hanging on is something that makes me sad. If I'm young forever, I could continue to improve until I am literally as strong as I could ever be. And that's something that I would love. I mean it's as profound an experience as any other. If you haven't lifted weights at a high level it's impossible to understand. To paraphrase, "If you've never had, then you can't understand what it would be like to lose it". I mean I know how different it feels on my body to pick up six hundred pounds off the ground, than it did to move four. How would it feel to move a thousand? 500 kg? That would be amazing to feel, and it's something that almost nobody gets to experience.

For reference, 533 people have been in space, they have experienced that. Only ONE person has deadlifted 500 kg. So it's an experience that's rarer than space travel. Only person has had that feeling. So that's why I would chase that, to have a profound experience that very few people have shared.

I personally don't think so, it's hard to be wise when all you can think about is cute boys and hunky dudes, you can’t mediate on the fundamental structures of the universe if you are sad because of your last breakup.

Here's the thing "meditating on the fundamental structures of the universe" is not how one becomes wise. It's experiencing things and then learning from them. Your least breakup might teach you more about the world than any amount of fasting in a cave ever would.

[Amazon]

Here's the thing "meditating on the fundamental structures of the universe" is not how one becomes wise. It's experiencing things and then learning from them. Your least breakup might teach you more about the world than any amount of fasting in a cave ever would.

I agree, but can you get over and learn things while being forever young? It seems young people never learn from their own mistakes.

[AMFV]

I agree, but can you get over and learn things while being forever young? It seems young people never learn from their own mistakes.

Well, to be honest, and I'm extrapolating here. But I'd wager that most of your experience is with people who are in universities. Who are missing the most important part of learning from their mistakes, serious consequences and responsibilities. I've known a lot of 20 year-olds who were more mature than most forty year-olds. Cause I knew 20 year-olds who might concievably die or get their friends killed if they didn't.

I've also known people who were working with families, who had to learn because they would be out on the streets if they didn't. And they learned better than some people I know who are much older.

So again, I don't think it's youth that's the factor that's making it into a problem, more like the consequences.

[Amazon]

Well, to be honest, and I'm extrapolating here. But I'd wager that most of your experience is with people who are in universities. Who are missing the most important part of learning from their mistakes, serious consequences and responsibilities. I've known a lot of 20 year-olds who were more mature than most forty year-olds. Cause I knew 20 year-olds who might concievably die or get their friends killed if they didn't.

I've also known people who were working with families, who had to learn because they would be out on the streets if they didn't. And they learned better than some people I know who are much older.

So again, I don't think it's youth that's the factor that's making it into a problem, more like the consequences.

Geez ok I get it you are all YVAN EHT NIOJ.

But you seem to forget that people forced to mature at a younger age then normal develop deep psychological issues, this "early maturing" you seem so proud of is not a good thing.

[AMFV]

Geez ok I get it you are all YVAN EHT NIOJ.

I don't think I recommended that. I only said that particular set of experiences could cause a person to develop faster, in terms of wisdom and life experiences. I don't think that's always a positive.

But you seem to forget that people forced to mature at a younger age then normal develop deep psychological issues, this "early maturing" you seem so proud of is not a good thing.

Are you saying that I have deep psychological issues? That feels like I should be profoundly offended. Although I'm not actually. The thing that causes psychological issues generally is having too many intense experiences without enough time to process them. People have psychological breakdowns when they'er older as well.

Also the people I knew who had matured faster because they had jobs and family, are typically not suffering from any immediately apparent "deep psychological issues". They just had to mature faster and so they did. If you haven't had to have that particular set of attributes, you probably won't develop them. So if the eternally young people are having responsibilities in-line with their calendar age, you're likely to see roughly equivalent degrees of maturity, at least supposing that "eternal youth" stopped around the point when the brain was fully developed.

And also, people who have been to war do not all have "deep psychological issues" that's a Hollywood myth. I had issues, and you know what, I got over them, or at least got to where they were manageable. I'm fairly sure that I am a better person than I was before I went to war. Actually objectively I am a better person. So I'm pretty okay with that "early maturing" that you're dismissing out of hand without ever having experienced, and as far as I can tell not having ever met folks who have experienced.

[Amazon]

I'm sure a 12 year old girl who has to take care of three younger brothers or a a 10 year old who gets beat up by his drunk dad and has to protect his own mom are forced to mature faster than other kids.

I'm also sure that's not good for them. Do you disagree?

[AMFV]

I'm sure a 12 year old girl who ahs tot ake care of three younger brothers or a a 10 year old who gets beat up by his drunk dad and has to protect his own mom are forced to mature faster than other kids.

I'm also sure that's not good for you. Do you disagree?

Right, but that wasn't the scenario I was discussing. Are you arguing that going to war is the same as having to care for younger siblings as a teenager? Or being physically assaulted by a drunk father as a child? Because while those experiences are likely to cause premature maturity. That doesn't mean that all experiences that cause people to mature are necessarily going to have the same sort of negative traumatic impact as those.

So, no being abused as a child is bad. Although not every child who gets abused is going to be a complete wreck as an adult. And it's pretty offensive that you would say that. And while being abused as a child, getting married at 19, and having a kid, so that you can't go out and binge drink and party with friends and blow off work or tests. That's not bad. And that also would cause somebody to be relatively more mature than a college student.

[Amazon]

Right, but that wasn't the scenario I was discussing.

We are discussing premature maturity... Hun that kind of sounds funny. And that includes abuse. You said yourself that you know youth who are more mature because they could conceivably die or get their loved ones killed if they didn’t so same principle.

Are you arguing that going to war is the same as having to care for younger siblings as a teenager? Or being physically assaulted by a drunk father as a child?

Well, it sure isn't a walk in the park, don't you agree?

Because while those experiences are likely to cause premature maturity. That doesn't mean that all experiences that cause people to mature are necessarily going to have the same sort of negative traumatic impact as those.

It seem that it mostly does, at least for premature maturity, prove it otherwise, if you want to go on that path.

So, no being abused as a child is bad. Although not every child who gets abused is going to be a complete wreck as an adult.

Never said that, I dunno why you mention it.

And it's pretty offensive that you would say that.

Again never said that Don't project your issues on me.

And while being abused as a child, getting married at 19, and having a kid, so that you can't go out and binge drink and party with friends and blow off work or tests. That's not bad. And that also would cause somebody to be relatively more mature than a college student.

I... Is that what you think college is for? What is your frame of reference? American pie? Hahahaha And here you are accusing me of having a biased view on the military. HA! I can't even.