Scientists develop a pill that extends your life span by 500+ years. Would you take it?

[ricmat]

Ricmat: Thanks for your contribution.

I don’t agree, as for me, physical life is it’s own reward, independent of any meaning it may have; I’d rather remain alive without any meaning than find meaning and then die. And my guess is that the vast majority of average citizens being nonphilosophers would in part agree with me.

Still, thanks again.

ICXC NIKA

We all die in the end.

And IMHO it seems that some people are “ready” at age 20, some at 40, some at 80, and some are never ready - even with 1000 years to prepare. But knowing that the end is coming soon is an incentive to start changing.

In the psalms it says that God adds years to our life that we might have more time to find him. If you know you’ll live to 1000, when would you start looking? And if you found him at age 20, why would you want to live another 980 on this earth?

Don’t you trust God to give you the time you need? After all, our purpose here is to learn to love like God does. That’s why we were created.

I actually haven’t thought about this subject lately, so my thoughts above are not well organized…

 

[Phaedra777]

I wouldn’t take it. I wouldn’t even take a pill that magically turned me 18 again! I am quite content to move on to the next stage.

Don’t know if it’s related, but I never liked the idea of reincarnation–just to keep cycling over and over–blech! Seemed so pointless! (And yes, I know a belief in reincarnation is incompatible with the Church.)

To extend earthly life that long holds no appeal for me.

 

[Hypnotoad]

And is there anything in current Church theology to suggest that consumption of the pill would be sinful?

Of course, the above scenario is hypothetical

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060704050625/en.futurama/images/8/85/Hypnotoad_animated.gif

To be honest I don’t believe this pill would really change anything because the scientists could never guarantee the results. if anything this pill would be viewed in the same light as proper nutrition and exercise which are things that can improve your odds for a longer life but they do not guarantee a longer life. I do not see anything that could ever be sinful about this pill since things like proper nutrition and exercises are encouraged by the Church and I believe commanded by the 5th commandment: thou shalt not kill applies to yourself and when you do not take the necessary steps to improve your health you are killing yourself. In the end when you die is ultimately beyond your control.

It’s funny because humans are very proud beings even though they can never guarantee themselves anything in this life. Eating right and exercise does not guarantee a longer life, a good education does not guarantee a job, practicing does not guarantee 1st place and so on and so forth. There is a force beyond human control that ultimately decides the outcome of such things and yet humans still give all kudos to themselves.

 

[Catholic90]

Would that mean I would have to keep working to about age 480?

That is a lot of years of working…

I am tired already.

 

[Bearontherun]

I think that taking such a pill could increase the danger of people “putting off” crucial activities like “getting right with God.” People could become over-confident in “man’s abilities” and perhaps place their trust in the time that they expect to live.

 

[Hypnotoad]

Would that mean I would have to keep working to about age 480?

That is a lot of years of working…

I am tired already.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Hey at least you would know how Adam and Eve felt.

 

[Warrior1979]

And is there anything in current Church theology to suggest that consumption of the pill would be sinful?

As long as it also doesn’t double as birth control, it should be okay.

I believe there is a passage in the OT where God’s sets man’s life span at 120 years - I tried to find it but couldn’t - maybe someone could clarify this for me.

I don’t know about the OT, but there is a good explanation in “The Real Science Behind the X-Files”. To make the explanation really simple, cells can only reproduce so many times before the organism stops functioning (due to cell damage introduced during cell reproduction)…which just so happens to be in the 120-122 year range.

 

[kayla]

Why? So I can stand in the checkout line of WalMart for a good part of that 500 years? Purgatory sounds a little more attractive than that, IMHO; you’d know you were going to heaven (eventually.)

Seriously, though, longevity for its own sake is a neutral, and therefore, somewhat pointless good, when it comes to one’s eventual eternal salvation. I’d really have to think long and hard about what I’d do with that five hundred years before taking it, or better yet, what God would have assigned for me to do for five hundred years.

Gee…and all this time I thought Walmart was part of Purgatory!

 

[Speedypizza]

I myself would not take the pill, however not because of the reasons others have listed. I would not take the pill because I do not want to have to live in the world 300 years from now. Not saying I would not like to see it, I would love to see it, but not live in it.

In the end the world would change, but I would not. I think of my Grandmother who is 90 now, only 1/5 of my new lifespan and how hard it is for her to understand and accept the world of today. Computers scare her, and she is not happy with the speed things move at now. She hates modern movies and TV shows, other then a few game shows.

I am only 32 and I already start to see what age is like. I don’t “get” a lot of modern music, don’t care about new movies much. The other day I heard on the radio that they are working on computers with no keyboard that you talk into. I don’t want one, I like my keyboard. My 6 year old will like it though. The young adapt well, the old do not.

Now try to imagine this in light of 500 years. I think a life that long would be insane here on earth.

 

[Robert_Sock]

I’m sitting here wanting to die and Go to Heaven! Who in their right mind would take the pill?

 

[laircy]

Yikes! If God wanted us to live that long, he would let us live that long. And He definitely knows best. I wouldn’t like the idea, for the same reasons others have stated.

 

[GEddie]

Well there are many things “scientifically developed” that we as Catholics may not use on pain of sin. One is even commonly just referred to “The Pill”…
Science has also developed ways to Blow up the world, Poison the world, or infect the world with horrible viral diseases.
So I don’t think that scientific development is tied to God’s will in a strictly good way.

Peace
James

“The pill” has medical uses unrelated to it’s vaunted application in stopping conception; for those needs, it is perfectly morally legit. As such, it is morally neutral.

And while I would not want to see nuclear weapons used again, I firmly believe that their presence has prevented another world war from starting long since. Again, morally a wash.

The same technology that allows virus bombs also allows retroviral therapies. It all balances out.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Flyingg]

I think I won’t take it alone because I don’t don’t know how much I can handle the pain of seeing persons I love dying before me, but if most people start taking it, then I might accept because it becomes more generalized and not so different from our current life long medicines.

 

[meltzerboy]

Three further comments on this issue:

One is in connection with Voltaire’s short story, “Micromegas,” in which the hero meets a group of people who live a very extended life. He finds that they are no happier, no wiser, and no less fearful of dying at the age of many thousands of years than he is.

The second is based on several “Twilight Zone” episodes, one of which involves a group of thieves who steal a truckload of gold and develop a device so that they can survive in suspended animation for a hundred years, similar to Rip van Winkle. At the end of the episode, the one remaining (the other thieves were killed by each other due to their greed) finds that gold is no longer worth anything in the present society since it can be manufactured. The point is that if we take the pill today and live 500+ years, who knows what inventions might be created in the future to make longevity no longer desirable: perhaps a kind of virtual reality life, of which we would not be able to participate due to the effects of the pill we have taken. There would have to be an “escape” clause, such as instant death, this based on another “Twilight Zone” episode, involving a man granted immortality by Satan–even immunity to injury by accident–in exchange for his soul, who winds up being convicted of murdering his wife and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The third point is concerned with factors I and others have already mentioned, such as overpopulation, scarcity of resources, working “forever,” the necessity of constant retraining, too much leisure time after final retirement, an over-extended family (!), the likelihood of laziness and wasting time, postponing exercise and going on a diet indefinitely, more focus on materialism and less on spirituality than ever, and so on. There are so many personal and social implications that are part of living longer. Nonetheless, I’d take the pill, if only out of curiosity concerning what will happen in the world hundreds of years from now with regard to our systems of government, religious beliefs, scientific discoveries, the state of the arts, education, etc.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

From the Catechism:

Respect for health

2288 Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.
Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.

2289 If morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value. It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body, to sacrifice everything for it’s sake, to idolize physical perfection and success at sports. By its selective preference of the strong over the weak, such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships.

2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.

2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.

I think the morality of this anti-aging pill (I assume this is what the OP has in mind) would depend on a) is aging a disease, b) is it reasonable to prevent the aging process, and c) will this serve the common good? I am neutral as far this goes. One might conclude that aging is a disease as it slowly kills us and was not God’s original design for human beings and that it is reasonable to treat a disease that would otherwise kill the patient. Issues like overpopulation and resource depletion could potentially be alleviated with an ambitious program of space exploration, mining, and colonization. Combine this with some kind of universal distribution system to ensure all receive the anti-aging therapy, and it might be possible to conclude it is serving the common good. However, I am not certain of any of this.

 

[abucs]

If i took two of those pills could i double up to a thousand years?

I guess a further complication would be if you had to go into debt for 450 years to pay for the price of the pill would you do it.

 

[GEddie]

From the Catechism:

I think the morality of this anti-aging pill (I assume this is what the OP has in mind) would depend on a) is aging a disease, b) is it reasonable to prevent the aging process, and c) will this serve the common good? I am neutral as far this goes. One might conclude that aging is a disease as it slowly kills us and was not God’s original design for human beings and that it is reasonable to treat a disease that would otherwise kill the patient. Issues like overpopulation and resource depletion could potentially be alleviated with an ambitious program of space exploration, mining, and colonization. Combine this with some kind of universal distribution system to ensure all receive the anti-aging therapy, and it might be possible to conclude it is serving the common good. However, I am not certain of any of this.

Most elective medical items that persons turn to do not have “the common good” in mind; why should this be any different? Are Christians required to improve their physical being ONLY if it somehow benefits everybody?

Fear of future social changes IMNAAHO do not equate to a morality issue as such.

ICXC NIKA

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

Most elective medical items that persons turn to do not have “the common good” in mind; why should this be any different? Are Christians required to improve their physical being ONLY if it somehow benefits everybody?

I don’t think demonstrating benefits for everyone is a necessary condition for the common good. It does require us to think carefully about the impacts of radical life extension, which I am not opposed to. Unlike most elective medical procedures, this hypothetical pill will have significant effects for society will no longer experience aging. Of course, we could find ways to deal with those effects. I see nothing wrong with life extension and think it is coming, sooner or later, and that humankind will adapt well to it.

In all truth, this pill doesn’t make anyone live to 500. If I am understanding the OP correctly, this is an anti-aging pill that stops or otherwise slows down the aging process. If I take the pill, I could be hit by a bus as I cross the street to my car. I could cut off the wrong guy in traffic as I go home to celebrate. I could have a heart attack well short of 500 years. Lots of things could happen. A medical cure for aging just means we could potentially live to 500 years, 1000 years, etc. Actual life expectancies could still fall well short of that.

 

[Cyclophile]

Interesting question… I might. but where the moral issue lay is with population…

If we are all sticking around longer, this would have to lead to a reduction in reproduction or else we would expand to the point as a species to where the Earth would no longer be able to support us.

If we were advanced enough that we could travel to the other planets in our solar system and perhaps Earth-type worlds in other systems… then that would alleviate the population problem…

…and presumably, you’d be able to make the entire trip w/o having to go into suspended animation since your lifespan would be so long.

Since I have no faith in our species being able to leave the planet anytime soon (fraking NASA!!) … I think such a life extension would be morally wrong as it would also require (eventually) birth control …

Or …just as bad… When you reach a certain age, Logan’s run type executions.

 

[GEddie]

I, for one, would gladly renounce having children if I could somehow lose natural death. Since I have no one to have them with, and am not looking, that’s not really much to give up.

I agree that for young people, there might be a “generational” issue.

This could be alleviated if this “pill” were made available, not to the young, but to the post-reproductive middle-aged citizens. Still hale enough to enjoy a long life: no longer a concern for potential overcrowding.

IMNAAHO, expecting people to turn down a lengthened life “because the planet may become overcrowded” is unrealistic.

ICXC NIKA.