One thing that preoccupies me is that so many resources go into Technology and so few into retirement savings, even on a national level. While living longer is cool and we must absolutely pursue this, we must also create favorable economic conditions for us to be able to afford to live longer. Otherwise, we'll simply outlive our retirement savings.
I have come to the conclusion that life only has meaning if we know we are going to die. I like the idea of future generations looking back at our present and being grateful for how we managed the world.
I think about that idea when I'm trying to remove bias, such as:
If the Big Bang and evolution hadn't happened yet, so we weren't biased to think about lifespans that we've heard of so far, how long would I say people SHOULD live?
"Most H. sapiens born in the history of humanity, a little over one hundred billion of us, if we’re counting every soul that has ever lived didn’t live to be even twenty years old.
Think about that.
Most did not even live to be twenty years old."
I also like his point about Aron Ralston, the mountaineer who in 2003 amputated his own right forearm with a dull pocketknife after it became trapped by a boulder while he was canyoneering in Utah's Blue John Canyon.
The point is that most people would have instinctively behaved similarly to save their life (even though it was a serious and painful and permanent sacrifice).
It makes one wonder why we don't make less dramatic sacrifices in our everyday lives to extend our survival.
One thing that preoccupies me is that so many resources go into Technology and so few into retirement savings, even on a national level. While living longer is cool and we must absolutely pursue this, we must also create favorable economic conditions for us to be able to afford to live longer. Otherwise, we'll simply outlive our retirement savings.
In the US, the average person is unhealthy AND in debt.
Often because of terrible choices, but also often because of terrible structural issues in our society.
So yeah, there will be a lot to solve!
I have come to the conclusion that life only has meaning if we know we are going to die. I like the idea of future generations looking back at our present and being grateful for how we managed the world.
I may have thought that too.
So many people have different impressions of what the meaning of life is.
It definitely seems tricky to me.
These days, although I don't have an answer, I like thinking about the "Veil of ignorance" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_position) from philosopher John Rawls.
I think about that idea when I'm trying to remove bias, such as:
If the Big Bang and evolution hadn't happened yet, so we weren't biased to think about lifespans that we've heard of so far, how long would I say people SHOULD live?
I guarantee I wouldn't say 28 years, 40 years, 60 years, 75 years, any of the years shown on this graph of life expectancy over time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_by_world_region,_from_1770_to_2018.svg), or even hundreds of years.
I don't know how I'd come up with a number, but those numbers feel arbitrary and small.
I don't know that I'd choose a number as large as "Whenever the sun (or whatever other star we're near eventually) finally goes extinct".
That's extreme too.
I'm reading Johnson's book "Don't Die" now.
Quote:
"Most H. sapiens born in the history of humanity, a little over one hundred billion of us, if we’re counting every soul that has ever lived didn’t live to be even twenty years old.
Think about that.
Most did not even live to be twenty years old."
I also like his point about Aron Ralston, the mountaineer who in 2003 amputated his own right forearm with a dull pocketknife after it became trapped by a boulder while he was canyoneering in Utah's Blue John Canyon.
The point is that most people would have instinctively behaved similarly to save their life (even though it was a serious and painful and permanent sacrifice).
It makes one wonder why we don't make less dramatic sacrifices in our everyday lives to extend our survival.