Positioning of the radical life extension idea


positioning, life extension, radical life extension, immortalism, transhumanism, fighting aging, fight against aging, aging, lifespan increase, healthspan, healthspan increase, rejuvenation, age-related diseases, choice

There are several ways of positioning the ideas of radical life extension:

1. Defeating aging
The main objection here is that this kind of presentation of the problem scares people, since it looks non-scientific. And it does this especially to people who are in no way involved with science or to those who have never dealt with studying the mechanisms of aging.

2. Controlling aging

3. Fighting age-related pathologies
I belive if you put it this way, the message looks wrong. It’s medicine that fights diseases. We propose to fight the causes.

4. Body rejuvenation
Well, this formulation kind of associates with folk-medicine.

5. Getting rid of age-related changes in an organism
Some people, especially in the western world, believe this presentation of the issue to be the optimal one. It doesn’t seem that way to me, though. Maybe science will follow the path of improving the regenerative potential of the body. This formulation sounds more acceptable, but I’m afraid it doesn’t really motivate people to make a personal effert to solve the problem.

6. Immortalism
The majority of people state that this word sounds scary and not clear. Same thing about immortality. But on the other hand, people who support the ideas of immortalism are much more motivated to actually achieve the result.

7. Transhumanism
Oh, this one sounds even more scary. But as a matter of fact, it’s about maximum possible lifespan extension and maximum possible improvement of one’s abilities. Maybe the term should be different; maybe it’d be better to go back to the word “humanism,” but I’m not sure.

8. Healthspan increase
Sounds really formal and official, for governmental use. And it’s absolutely not clear that we speak not about jogging, but about research in genetics, biochemistry, biophysics, etc.

9. Radical life extension

6 Comments

Filed under Immortalism, Life Extension, Transhumanism

6 responses to “Positioning of the radical life extension idea

  1. Alexei

    What do you think about such radical way of life extension as complete body replacement? The new body will be made via cloning and only small part of it will be taken from the old body – i.e. part of the brain?

  2. Martin O'Dea

    Hi Maria
    I agree entirely with your comment re returning to humanism. Would it not be transhumanism when we first adopted certain forms of medicine, or organ transplants, prosthesis, cave dwelling, use of the wheel and so on.
    I believe that the public is in ways correct to take an instant dislike of the term transhumanism as it reveals a disatisfaction with ‘current’ humans; and also as Max Moore called it a hankering for the ‘geek rapture’

  3. Hi Martin,
    I have to add that general puplic thinks in stereotypes, which are to a large extent taken from science fiction, where advances in technology bring people nothing but trouble. There’s a lack of positive representation of future and of life extension in partucular.

  4. About the complete body replacement – I see absolutely no harm in that. Quite the opposite, once the organs fail, they’ll be replaced with the engineered ones. I am not sure it’s going to cloning in particular, there are several other methods in tissue engineering. The most suitable would save our lives. This is our opportunity to travel to the future.
    The only problem here is that more research in regenerative medicine is needed. And more funding, of cource. But I’m pretty sure, the Roadmap in Regenerative Medicine can help increase funding.

  5. Martin O'Dea

    I agree Maria,
    The truth is if we – as a species – awoke to an orange sky and a blue moon; we would still fall asleep, go to the toilet and so on… we would certainly be taken aback for some time, but eventually we would just get on with it. Of course, radical change is something we are hardwired to be cautious of – and so agents of change must be very clear about their motivation; the betterment of all humans, for example; and it is unhelpful of us to get angry at those who do not embrace our ideas immediately. I think you do great work by the way and really enjoyed the Roadmap in Regenerative Medicine

  6. Martin O'Dea

    I just reread that and with all my effort at a nice analogy I had to go and ruin it!!
    Of course I meant orange sky and blue sun!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s