A Novel Critique Of Life Prolongation

You may remember that four way debate on life extension over at Cato Unbound between Dan Callahan, Diana Schaub, Aubrey de Grey, and Ron Bailey. Nothing much came of it, except for the revelation that Diana Schaub gets a tad sanctimonious when her back is up.

If deathlessness ever arrives for human beings, I would cast my lot with the elephants who are said to gather and grieve over the bones of their departed. Elephant culture might already have surpassed the culture of immortalists. Based on the posts so far, cultural ignorance -- of the history of religion and love and politics -- is one clear cost of the quest for a non-transcendent immortality.

Huh. I'd wear a cap in her classroom every chance I got.

Oh yeah, Callahan's opinion is pretty much value free. Now there's an old nag that's crying out for pasturing.

I'd hoped for more.

And wouldn't you know it, the universe came through for me. The discussion got picked up over at Volokh's, leading to a truly original insight in the comments section by some guy named Dangermouse. He pretty much set everyone straight on the error of their ways (Bad life extensionists! Bad! Bad!) with an appeal to higher authority that, quite frankly, left me croggled. See, the quest for extended youth is evil and pointless because the Silmarillion tells us so. In the interests of scientific curiosity, I'm reproducing this mangled intellectual cud in its entirety...


This is the Akallabêth all over again. You people need to read more Tolkien:

But the King said: 'And does not Eärendil, my forefather, live? Or is he not in the land of Aman?'

To which they answered: 'You know that he has a fate apart, and was adjudged to the Firstborn who die not; yet this also is his doom that he can never return again to mortal lands. Whereas you and your people are not of the Firstborn, but are mortal Men as Ilúvatar made you. Yet it seems that you desire now to have the good of both kindreds, to sail to Valinor when you will, and to return when you please to your homes. That cannot be. Nor can the Valar take away the gifts of Ilúvatar. The Eldar, you say, are unpunished, and even those who rebelled do not die. Yet that is to them neither reward nor punishment, but the fulfilment of their being. They cannot escape, and are bound to this world, never to leave it so long as it lasts, for its life is theirs. And you are punished for the rebellion of Men, you say, in which you had small part, and so it is that you die. But that was not at first appointed for a punishment. Thus you escape, and leave the world, and are not bound to it, in hope or in weariness. Which of us therefore should envy the others?"

And the Númenóreans answered: 'Why should we not envy the Valar, or even the least of the Deathless? For of us is required a blind trust, and a hope without assurance, knowing not what lies before us in a little while. And yet we also love the Earth and would not lose it.'

Then the Messengers said: 'Indeed the mind of Ilúvatar concerning you is not known to the Valar, and he has not revealed all things that are to come. But this we hold to be true, that your home is not here, neither in the Land of Aman nor anywhere within the Circles of the World. And
the Doom of Men, that they should depart, was at first a gift of Ilúvatar. It became a grief to them only because coming under the shadow of Morgoth it seemed to them that they were surrounded by a great darkness, of which they were afraid; and some grew wilful and proud and would not yield,
until life was reft from them. We who bear the ever-mounting burden of the years do not clearly understand this; but if that grief has returned to trouble you, as you say, then we fear that the Shadow arises once more and grows again in your hearts. Therefore, though you be the Dúnedain, fairest of Men, who escaped from the Shadow of old and fought valiantly against it, we say to you: Beware! The will of Eru may not be gainsaid; and the Valar bid you earnestly not to withhold the trust to which you are called, lest soon it become again a bond by which you are constrained. Hope rather that in the end even the least of your desires shall have fruit. The love of Arda was set in your hearts by Ilúvatar, and he does not plant to no purpose. Nonetheless, many ages of Men unborn may pass ere that purpose is made known; and to you it will be revealed and not to the Valar.'

Settled their hash, didn't he? My condolences if you made it all the way through.

posted by Justin on 04.21.08 at 10:22 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/6519






Comments

So his scripture is a work the author didn't think was fit for publication yet.

James   ·  April 21, 2008 11:07 AM

Surely the obvious argument against life prolongation is the extreme conservatism (in a sociological, not political, sense) with which society would become pervaded?

We already see this in the West, especially in Euroland and Japan.

As (I believe) Heinlein once put it, everybody dies: but not everybody really lives.

David Hecht   ·  April 21, 2008 11:18 AM

Dammit ... my eyes are bleeding from reading that.

Once mankind becomes immortal, it dies.

(now, there is nothing wrong with living a bit longer though ... but let Castro be an example of why we need 'term life limits')

mdmhvonpa   ·  April 21, 2008 01:29 PM

I would have chosen other works of Tolkien - The Silmarillion's style still leaves me cold after many attempts - but I consider dangermouse's point well-taken. In an uncharted area - where we have no frigging idea what the consequences are going to be for our personalities, societies, and families - artists, prophets, and writers are an excellent place to look. Because the novels are fiction and Tolkien ultimately controls the result, we cannot rely on such opinions as definitive or a basis for law. He has thought much about the subject, however, as the theme of immortality or exceeding long life is expressed repeatedly in different characters, each of which has a very different experience of extended years: Gollum, Bombadil, Sauron, or the ents, elves, and wizards all see the passing of the world in different ways. Tolkien was about as thoroughly familiar with the Western Canon as it is possible to be. Its philosophers, writers, historical figures, and traditions informed his decades-long contemplation of this very issue. You might think his conclusions wrong, or prefer the reasoning of others on the subject, but you cannot dismiss him as silly.

I suspect that your antipathy to dangermouse's reasoning is more properly seen as a dislike of the fantasy genre (not that there's anything wrong with that). Fantasy strikes many people as ridiculous, and I don't think there's any way around that. They haven't the taste for it. But until the explosion of pulp fantasy fiction in the 1970's, fantasy literature was a primary ground for the contemplation of deeper issues. Edmund Spenser may come to mind here. Even in children's literature, the complexity of moral questions encountered in Prydain and Narnia utterly swamps anything by Judy Blume.

Assistant Village Idiot   ·  April 21, 2008 01:59 PM

When people tell me I shouldn't do something, that makes me want to do it.
Especially when the thing they tell me I shouldn't want has never been experienced.

And if we're going to use fiction to argue, what about Lazarus Long and Connor McCloud of the Clan McCloud? The lived for a long time and were pretty cool.
But then, vampires seem to make the opposite point.
What about the elves in Tolkein? Sure they're sanctimonious pricks, but they usually don't hurt anyone who doesn't need it. But Tom Bombadil was very cool.
Now I'm all confused, maybe I should not use fictional stories about fictional people doing fictional things to make up my mind.

Of course, I want to live a long time. I'm curious to see where we're headed and I would really like to not die on the Earth.

Veeshir   ·  April 21, 2008 02:59 PM

The thing is, we don't know for sure what would happen if we had a society full of deathless people, or if that's even possible. As far as we know in terms of fact, every person that has been born has died, or will die. We may be able to prolong life quite a bit now, and perhaps more in the future, but we still have to reconcile ourselves to our mortal nature. And our mortal nature is this: not merely that we do die, but that we can die. Even if we hold death from natural causes at bay, there is still enough potential for accidents, murder, or simply world-weariness to get each of us eventually.

I'm really not sure where I'm going with this... but perpetual life-extension seems like an unknown that has a lot of unpleasant possibilities. Be prepared for some unexpected consequences.

John S.   ·  April 21, 2008 04:37 PM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)



April 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits