First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last

crispr reverse aging

Post Reply
36326 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
24 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18
I'm already immortal.
mxdan 
12386 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
28 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18

runec wrote:
We evolve because we keep issuing new models so to speak. If we cease aging ( and thus dying ) we effectively become a genetic bottleneck on our own evolution.


And this, was the single most depressing realization for me early on in biology. Once you realize that youre simply a tool of some bjorg like system of perfection and your individuality is completely stripped from you, you sort of realize, fuck, this is kind of bleak huh...

Course, it is kind of a half full half empty kind of scenario, but i do still kind of find it hard to reconcile my individuality with my purpose cause the truth of that purpose seems to completely strip away any sort of narrative or meaning. Especially when you realize that very meaning may be constructed simply to better orientate that system of perfection.
qwueri 
26952 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
33 / M / TN
Online
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18

mxdan wrote:

And this, was the single most depressing realization for me early on in biology. Once you realize that your simply a tool of some bjorg like system of perfection and your individuality is completely stripped from you, you sort of realize, fuck, this is kind of bleak huh...

Course, it is kind of a half full half empty kind of scenario, but i do still kind of find it hard to reconcile my individuality with my purpose cause the truth of that purpose seems to completely strip away any sort of narrative or meaning. Especially when you realize that very meaning may be constructed simply to better orientate that system of perfection.


Eh, it's less a system pursuing perfection as a species than it is a constant game of trial and error in a constantly changing system with individuals working with, against, and around each other. Each individual matters, but it gets difficult to track each cascade of interactions on a macro level.
mxdan 
12386 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
28 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18

qwueri wrote:


mxdan wrote:

And this, was the single most depressing realization for me early on in biology. Once you realize that your simply a tool of some bjorg like system of perfection and your individuality is completely stripped from you, you sort of realize, fuck, this is kind of bleak huh...

Course, it is kind of a half full half empty kind of scenario, but i do still kind of find it hard to reconcile my individuality with my purpose cause the truth of that purpose seems to completely strip away any sort of narrative or meaning. Especially when you realize that very meaning may be constructed simply to better orientate that system of perfection.


Eh, it's less a system pursuing perfection as a species than it is a constant game of trial and error in a constantly changing system with individuals working with, against, and around each other. Each individual matters, but it gets difficult to track each cascade of interactions on a macro level.


Well, yeah, a virus entering a cell infiltrates the nucleus largely because of the trial and error systems it has developed over time. They have changed to hijack a cells very own highway system to move. They have capsid proteins on the outside of them that use the bodies immune system to break down and better move through systems. This was of course trial and error. But I think it is also, frankly speaking, an unspoken process that seeks to better orientate itself (Or 'perfect' itself). When I say 'perfect' I mean it as a process with no attribution of positives or negatives in outcomes but in intention. A body doesn't orientate itself to implode unless there is reason.

And it was very difficult to track at a macro level but that is changing due to advances in computing.
runec 
43137 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18

mxdan wrote:
And this, was the single most depressing realization for me early on in biology. Once you realize that your simply a tool of some bjorg like system of perfection and your individuality is completely stripped from you, you sort of realize, fuck, this is kind of bleak huh...


Mother Nature's a hardcore nihilist.
qwueri 
26952 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
33 / M / TN
Online
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/27/18

mxdan wrote:

Well, yeah, a virus entering a cell infiltrates the nucleus largely because of the trial and error systems it has developed over time. They have changed to hijack a cells very own highway system to move. They have capsid proteins on the outside of them that use the bodies immune system to break down and better move through systems. This was of course trial and error. But I think it is also, frankly speaking, an unspoken process that seeks to better orientate itself (Or 'perfect' itself). When I say 'perfect' I mean it as a process with no attribution of positives or negatives in outcomes but in intention. A body doesn't orientate itself to implode unless there is reason.

And it was very difficult to track at a macro level but that is changing due to advances in computing.


It's a process favoring individuals capable of surviving and passing their traits on. Beyond a coordinated effort by humans or other such intelligent beings, there's not much orientation beyond that.

And big data has a long way to go even tracking and making sense of an integrated system like tweets on a macro level. Never mind input of day to day individuals beyond a very narrow criteria like shopping habits or China's demerit system.
mxdan 
12386 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
28 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 9/26/18 , edited 9/26/18

qwueri wrote:


mxdan wrote:

Well, yeah, a virus entering a cell infiltrates the nucleus largely because of the trial and error systems it has developed over time. They have changed to hijack a cells very own highway system to move. They have capsid proteins on the outside of them that use the bodies immune system to break down and better move through systems. This was of course trial and error. But I think it is also, frankly speaking, an unspoken process that seeks to better orientate itself (Or 'perfect' itself). When I say 'perfect' I mean it as a process with no attribution of positives or negatives in outcomes but in intention. A body doesn't orientate itself to implode unless there is reason.

And it was very difficult to track at a macro level but that is changing due to advances in computing.


It's a process favoring individuals capable of surviving and passing their traits on. Beyond a coordinated effort by humans or other such intelligent beings, there's not much orientation beyond that.

And big data has a long way to go even tracking and making sense of an integrated system like tweets on a macro level. Never mind input of day to day individuals beyond a very narrow criteria like shopping habits or China's demerit system.


To be honest, I think your being a bit ridiculous here. Our definitions match up in an overarching sense, I'm just saying I interpret the word perfection as it pertains to biology a bit differently then you do. I'm not saying that Biology isn't gene change, I'm saying that the gene variance creates a narrative to me and that narrative is that there is a fundamental force of change at the core in pursuit of some sort of 'concept' (Again, perfection). Variance exists because it needs to pass on genes in order to survive. It exists because it needs to. So when we see genes expressing themselves differently then I see it as a pursuit of change. It doesn't need to have intention to be a force. It just needs to show up.

As someone who works with biologists far smarter then myself I can tell you unequivocally data collection and interpretation of said data is perhaps far more suited for biology then just about any other science. And I think your conflating what I'm thinking in my area as something different then what your thinking.
32997 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/27/18 , edited 9/27/18

Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.
1591 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 9/27/18 , edited 9/27/18

Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.


I meant what I said within a certain context. There's nothing wrong with fighting the aging process by natural means such as by exercising and eating healthy. However, I see drastic measures that alter one's humanity and degrade crucial parts of their being as being a fearful and desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Also, mind you, cancer isn't something universal that's supposed to happen like aging is. Thus, I see it as being more permissible to take more drastic measures to cure cancer.
32997 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/27/18 , edited 9/27/18

Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.


I meant what I said within a certain context. There's nothing wrong with fighting the aging process by natural means such as by exercising and eating healthy. However, I see drastic measures that alter one's humanity and degrade crucial parts of their being as being a fearful and desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Also, mind you, cancer isn't something universal that's supposed to happen like aging is. Thus, I see it as being more permissible to take more drastic measures to cure cancer.


Curing Aging is hardly degrading crucial parts also the fear of aging is a good thing as it means we can use that to our advantage to deal with it.

Both are bad shit that shouldn't have to exist in my eyes the logic "it's inevitable so don't try accept it" is imo bad advice if we want to advance in these sorts of fields.
1591 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 9/28/18 , edited 9/28/18

Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.


I meant what I said within a certain context. There's nothing wrong with fighting the aging process by natural means such as by exercising and eating healthy. However, I see drastic measures that alter one's humanity and degrade crucial parts of their being as being a fearful and desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Also, mind you, cancer isn't something universal that's supposed to happen like aging is. Thus, I see it as being more permissible to take more drastic measures to cure cancer.


Curing Aging is hardly degrading crucial parts also the fear of aging is a good thing as it means we can use that to our advantage to deal with it.

Both are bad shit that shouldn't have to exist in my eyes the logic "it's inevitable so don't try accept it" is imo bad advice if we want to advance in these sorts of fields.


Call it pessimistic, but I take the perspective that death is incurable. We will all die, and this is a crucial part of what makes us human, not machine. The proposed cure that science and technology will come to offer won't be worth giving up what is essentially your soul. That is not me being overdramatic.
32997 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/28/18 , edited 9/28/18

Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.


I meant what I said within a certain context. There's nothing wrong with fighting the aging process by natural means such as by exercising and eating healthy. However, I see drastic measures that alter one's humanity and degrade crucial parts of their being as being a fearful and desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Also, mind you, cancer isn't something universal that's supposed to happen like aging is. Thus, I see it as being more permissible to take more drastic measures to cure cancer.


Curing Aging is hardly degrading crucial parts also the fear of aging is a good thing as it means we can use that to our advantage to deal with it.

Both are bad shit that shouldn't have to exist in my eyes the logic "it's inevitable so don't try accept it" is imo bad advice if we want to advance in these sorts of fields.


Call it pessimistic, but I take the perspective that death is incurable. We will all die, and this is a crucial part of what makes us human, not machine. The proposed cure that science and technology will come to offer won't be worth giving up what is essentially your soul. That is not me being overdramatic.



Yes we will all die it being crucial is debatable.

Also how do you give up something that is man made such as a soul?

This is literally just the same as doctors curing the a disease and things that would kill you back in the past
2954 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
42 / M
Online
Posted 9/28/18 , edited 9/28/18

XxDarkSasuxX wrote:

I'm already immortal.

you guys already think I'm crazy



Ryulightorb wrote:

Yes we will all die it being crucial is debatable.

Also how do you give up something that is man made such as a soul?

This is literally just the same as doctors curing the a disease and things that would kill you back in the past


How else do you wish to describe that which sees? Consciousness, Awareness....a soul.....is there any more than minute subtlety between these terms? (i.e. they all contain a similar definition.)

32997 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/28/18 , edited 9/28/18

BushyBrowSensei wrote:


XxDarkSasuxX wrote:

I'm already immortal.

you guys already think I'm crazy



Ryulightorb wrote:

Yes we will all die it being crucial is debatable.

Also how do you give up something that is man made such as a soul?

This is literally just the same as doctors curing the a disease and things that would kill you back in the past


How else do you wish to describe that which sees? Consciousness, Awareness....a soul.....is there any more than minute subtlety between these terms? (i.e. they all contain a similar definition.)



Well a soul is something that exists outside the body its spiritual big difference imo
1591 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 9/28/18 , edited 9/28/18

Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ruleaus wrote:

Aging is a part of life. Better to accept it than to fear and resist it.


Better to accept cancer then to fear and resist it.


I meant what I said within a certain context. There's nothing wrong with fighting the aging process by natural means such as by exercising and eating healthy. However, I see drastic measures that alter one's humanity and degrade crucial parts of their being as being a fearful and desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Also, mind you, cancer isn't something universal that's supposed to happen like aging is. Thus, I see it as being more permissible to take more drastic measures to cure cancer.


Curing Aging is hardly degrading crucial parts also the fear of aging is a good thing as it means we can use that to our advantage to deal with it.

Both are bad shit that shouldn't have to exist in my eyes the logic "it's inevitable so don't try accept it" is imo bad advice if we want to advance in these sorts of fields.


Call it pessimistic, but I take the perspective that death is incurable. We will all die, and this is a crucial part of what makes us human, not machine. The proposed cure that science and technology will come to offer won't be worth giving up what is essentially your soul. That is not me being overdramatic.



Yes we will all die it being crucial is debatable.

Also how do you give up something that is man made such as a soul?

This is literally just the same as doctors curing the a disease and things that would kill you back in the past


Certain alterations of the body, such as prosthetic limbs, I would not consider to dehumanize a person. However, to make humans immortal would require such an alteration so as to change our DNA. Changing the DNA in such a way makes us non-human, would you agree? Throughout history, many have thought of ourselves to have souls because of our being human. This is why you would be giving up your soul if you effectively decide to not be human anymore, whether you believe in the existence of a literal soul separate from the body or not. Let's take a look at the definition of a soul:

soul - the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.

The soul is immortal, not the human. Being immortal goes against the idea of a soul, because it is the soul that is supposed to be immortal, not the physical body.

First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.