by Schadenfreude » Tue 15 Apr 2008, 01:50:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'W')e aren't going to live forever because there is a genetic limit to human longevity.
Forget about all the moral and environmental concerns. And forget about the sheer outlandishness of the pursuit...
It seems like on the molecular level, the problem of aging reduces simply to understanding the chemistry underlying the copying and repairing of DNA information accurately while that chemical information is constantly being damaged or changed. Maybe aging is more fundamental than this?
On a purely scientific level, it doesn't appear to present an insurmountable barrier for human beings to understand the complex biochemical process of how DNA replicates and repairs itself on a cellular and mitochondrial level. And it doesn't seem like way far out science fiction that human beings will be able to manipulate and/or change the ways cells reproduce.
At the rate that bioengineering is advancing right now, I wouldn't put this sort of capability out much further than around 2050. That's not very far off.
I certainly would not want to live forever either. If given a choice between living a short life but one that is extremely rich in subjective experience and deep participation in the world, or living a life that is nearly interminable but essentially one that is just, well, me as I am now forever unchanging -- I think I'd have to opt for the former.