{"id":96359,"date":"2023-03-20T11:55:00","date_gmt":"2023-03-20T15:55:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/?p=96359"},"modified":"2023-03-22T11:56:36","modified_gmt":"2023-03-22T15:56:36","slug":"is-it-possible-to-live-forever","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/is-it-possible-to-live-forever\/","title":{"rendered":"Is It Possible to Live Forever and if So, Should We?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Is it possible to live forever? What are the potential implications of human immortality<\/a> for society at large?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

People have always been fascinated with immortality. However, we have never been as close to it as we are today. Medical technology is advancing<\/a> at an unprecedented pace, and many scientists believe that humanity is on the brink of a breakthrough that will pave the way toward technologies that will make eternal life possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keep reading to learn whether it’s possible to live forever and some potential implications of human immortality for the human species and societies at large.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Living Forever: Causes for Concern<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Is it possible to live forever? Historically, people have accepted death as an eventuality. Religions such as Christianity and Islam alleviate the fear of death<\/a> by creating grand depictions of the afterlife offered to those who obey religious standards. Because of these depictions of an afterlife, people haven\u2019t historically focused on preventing death. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, modern science suggests that, in theory, it is possible to live forever, and steps are already being taken to discover the secret to immortality. However, most life science organizations currently focus on expanding life expectancy. For reference, in 1900, the average life expectancy was 40; by 2000, it was 70. Using that trend as a guide, some believe that, as early as 2050, people will live twice as long as today. And it is only the beginning. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why Haven\u2019t Humans Evolved to Live Longer?<\/strong>

Theoretically, it would be a huge reproductive advantage to maintain health for more time\u2014imagine humans who lived to be 300 and reproduced for 100 years. So, the question arises: 

According to Benjamin Bikman, the author of Why We Get Sick<\/em><\/a>, there must be a competitive equilibrium at play<\/strong>\u2014living longer must confer some compensatory fitness disadvantage, and the inverse is true. <\/strong>The balance is between faster, more aggressive mating (which may necessarily cause decreased longevity) vs. longer lifespan (which may necessarily trade off with decreased fertility).
Animal experiments show that increasing lifespan causes lower and later reproduction. Somehow there is a tradeoff between longevity and vigor. For example, mice on caloric restriction extend their lifespans, but they don\u2019t reproduce. They stay suspended in a pre-reproductive state waiting for adequate food supply. <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

However, even if it is possible to live forever, it doesn\u2019t necessarily mean we should. <\/strong>According to Nassim Taleb, the author of Antifragile<\/em><\/a>, living forever would be a serious detriment to the human species. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In brief, Taleb\u2019s theory of antifragility\u2014becoming stronger after being damaged\u2014is that an antifragile system must be made up of fragile parts. An unexpected or stressful event destroys some of those fragile units, and then the rest of the system responds by not just repairing the damage, but by becoming strong enough to withstand that event in the future. A simple example is lifting weights: The exercise damages your muscles, which then become stronger as they heal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If we consider the human race to be a system, and each person to be a part of that system, Taleb\u2019s theory means that individuals living forever (in other words, losing their fragility) would paradoxically make the human race fragile. Perhaps some unexpected shock to the system\u2014a disease, a war, or a natural disaster\u2014would leave us unable to respond and recover. Or, perhaps we\u2019d simply wipe ourselves out through overpopulation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nTITLE: Antifragile
\nAUTHOR: Nassim Nicholas Taleb<\/a>
\nTIME: 60
\nREADS: 284.4
\nIMG_URL: https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/antifragile-cover.png
\nBOOK_SUMMARYURL: antifragile-summary-nassim-nicholas-taleb
\nAMZN_ID: XYZ
\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Causes for Optimism<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

While it\u2019s hard to say how immortality would affect the human species as a whole, we can anticipate how it would change human societies at large. In his book Lifespan<\/em><\/a>, Australian-American biologist David A. Sinclair imagines a world where people never die, outlining his chief concerns:<\/p>\n\n\n\n