Can you elaborate? Nothing can remain in a condition that makes it a particular thing forever without one acting to keep it so. A rock can’t remain a rock forever, unless you put it somewhere to prevent erosion. The only way a thing can remain essentially unchanged is if it is unaffected by other objects. That would mean to be unaffected by causality. But all things in reality are affected by causality.
I’m not sure if I used causality correctly here, but I’m sure you understand what I mean.
If you were a robot, you would need to take care of your internal wiring. If you did not do these things, at some point, decay would occur, no matter what you are “made” out of.
But such a robot could replace worn out parts with the latest technology, including downloading it’s entire memory and program to a new computer/brain. Much the same as every cell in your body is replaced every…what, seven years?.. and you are still you. So a robot could theoretically live forever.
Certain particles may leap into existence uncaused, according to physicists.
Nothing can remain in a condition that makes it a particular thing forever without one acting to keep it so. A rock can’t remain a rock forever, unless you put it somewhere to prevent erosion. The only way a thing can remain essentially unchanged is if it is unaffected by other objects. That would mean to be unaffected by causality. But all things in reality are affected by causality.
I’m not sure if I used causality correctly here, but I’m sure you understand what I mean.
Why do you believe that all things will decay over time without maintenance?
But such a robot could replace worn out parts with the latest technology, including downloading it’s entire memory and program to a new computer/brain. Much the same as every cell in your body is replaced every…what, seven years?.. and you are still you. So a robot could theoretically live forever.
It could live indefinitely (and theoretically even forever), sure, but would “immortal” be applicable if it *can* die?
Why do you believe that all things will decay over time without maintenance?
I already told you. Don’t focus on the decay so much. The important point is things cannot remain unchanged forever without being maintained. By unchanged, I mean still the same type of thing. A rock still being a rock rather than a lava flow. Nothing can remain unaffected by the things around it.
It could live indefinitely (and theoretically even forever), sure, but would “immortal” be applicable if it *can* die?
Depends on what your definition of immortal is. You began by saying only inanimate things like rocks were immortal. But can a rock be immortal if it is never alive? And a rock, like an asteroid, can fall into a star and be consumed - is it now dead? Whoops, I guess it’s not immortal by your definition above.
Depends on what your definition of immortal is. You began by saying only inanimate things like rocks were immortal. But can a rock be immortal if it is never alive? And a rock, like an asteroid, can fall into a star and be consumed - is it now dead? Whoops, I guess it’s not immortal by your definition above.
That’s why I put “immortal” in quotes there. The idea immortal only applies to living things, as you’re suggesting. It can’t “die” but it can be destroyed. So it may be better to say immortal is “a living thing that cannot die.”
By “same type of thing” I mean exactly that, snow being snow rather than rain, a tree being a tree rather than paper. To be alive you need to remain a rational being, and it requires action to remain a so. No matter what sci-fi or modern scenario you come up with, you need to act to continue your existence. The things that make you up - or more specifically, crucial things like your brain - are always capable of destruction. The things that make you up are what make living possible. Thus you cannot become immortal.
That’s why I put “immortal” in quotes there. The idea immortal only applies to living things, as you’re suggesting. It can’t “die” but it can be destroyed. So it may be better to say immortal is “a living thing that cannot die.”
By “same type of thing” I mean exactly that, snow being snow rather than rain, a tree being a tree rather than paper. To be alive you need to remain a rational being, and it requires action to remain a so. No matter what sci-fi or modern scenario you come up with, you need to act to continue your existence. The things that make you up - or more specifically, crucial things like your brain - are always capable of destruction. The things that make you up are what make living possible. Thus you cannot become immortal.
OK, it takes action to stay alive indefinitely. Fine. So if at some time in the future it becomes technologically possible for someone to take that action, they could become immortal.
By “same type of thing” I mean exactly that, snow being snow rather than rain, a tree being a tree rather than paper.
But how do you define “type of thing”?
To be alive you need to remain a rational being, and it requires action to remain a so. No matter what sci-fi or modern scenario you come up with, you need to act to continue your existence. The things that make you up - or more specifically, crucial things like your brain - are always capable of destruction. The things that make you up are what make living possible. Thus you cannot become immortal.
OK, it takes action to stay alive indefinitely. Fine. So if at some time in the future it becomes technologically possible for someone to take that action, they could become immortal.
But if they stop taking the actions that preserve what allows them to live, they die. Do you see what I mean? The fact you need to act to preserve anything means immortality is impossible. You could stay alive indefinitely, but that alone doesn’t make you immortal. Immortality is a mystical idea in my opinion, like omnipotence. Things like god are immortal. It can *never* die no matter what, not even with inaction.
Immortality is not the same as indestructibility.
Please define immortality then. I know of no other sense of immortality other than “living thing that cannot die”. If I read ITOE I probably could explain what I mean by “type of thing” better, but I think ‘a unit’ is the best I can do.
I guess so. It doesn’t seem too important, because you cannot live forever unless you preserve the things that allow you to live. Nothing can exist forever unless it is preserved.
If one is capable of destruction, why would you even bother saying immortal? I mean, what would you say when something immortal died, even though it was capable of living for an indefinite length of time? Clearly if something immortal died, it wasn’t even immortal to begin with.
On your definitions -
perpetual life after death; we know this to be impossible
living for an infinite or inconceivable amount of time; Inconceivable to whom? You seem to use this definition, but it seems entirely incomplete because death still applies. This is the worst definition of the 3.
not being suspectible to aging; Aren’t all things susceptible to aging?
Essentially they all imply an element of indestructibility. If you were not indestructible, you could die, and thus not immortal. The only way to be immortal is to also be indestructible. We cannot take these definitions as word of god, we can look at them and see what is important about all of them. They all refer to living literally forever, no matter what happens. Like a deity, like I said.
All things are susceptible to the universe collapsing into a single point of mass. But if the universe is continually expanding, then unending immortality could be discussed.
There are several values I think any human being can’t live without: your own life, it is the very reason you have values in the first place.
Your work. Maybe not true with all people, but for those who do something they have a passion for, this could easily be true.
Your spouse. If you are in a romantic relationship, and you have become very fond/attached to this person, they could easily be a value you can’t live without.
It could even be something minor. In Atlas Shrugged, a worker at the factory where John Galt first went on strike, he committed suicide because they wouldn’t let him have his cherished record collection.
It could even be something minor. In Atlas Shrugged, a worker at the factory where John Galt first went on strike, he committed suicide because they wouldn’t let him have his cherished record collection.
That’s interesting, I don’t remember that, but then again I haven’t read AS in over half a decade, just certain passages. Thanks, if you can point me to where that takes place in the novel (or anyone else) that’d be great. Lost my Oism CD-ROM like 2 years ago… Maybe I’ll just search it on Amazon.
Wow this just gets more interesting, while I am searching for suicide in said novel, I came upon this one, of Eric Starnes who was in love with a girl who married, and on that very wedding day, he got into their house, and slashed his wrists in their bedroom. What a bloody mess. But this quote is good and relevant here:
Who can pass judgement on another man’s suffering and on the limit of which he can bear?
Unfortunately I can’t remember what page that’s on, but I do remember where in the novel. It’s when you learn what happened to that factory: they basically put a communist doctrine into effect, and it caused the workers to “feed” on each other. A family would have a baby, so all the workers had to chip in. It came to the point where things had to be sacrificed, and I believe they had to take away the record collection of this one worker who loved music. He loved it so much, apparently, that he committed suicide.
I agree with that quote from page 299. Other than your own life, the hierarchy of a person’s values is personal more than anything else. It’s not your place to judge how much suffering another person can take unless you know their value system as well as he/she knows it. (This provides an interesting justification for something I’ve been thinking about recently…)
I can only speak personally in this thread: without the woman I love, without my main passions/work in life, I would not be able to go on living. My life simply wouldn’t have meaning anymore.
