Student: Nicole D. Willis

Professor: Erika Ruonakoski

Philosophy

Written Exercise 2:

Alternative 2: Utopia

What would life be like if we lived forever? Consequently, how does our mortality shape our lives?

Analogy:

• If we lived forever, we would neglect to take care of our health and/or the health of the planet. We would lose interest in the prevention of illness, in turn in the prevention of pollution of the environment. If one is immortal, one may loose interest in achieving anything at all as there is no immanent threat of death.

• However, if there is no immanent threat of death, we would have to insure a healthy planet, a clean & resourceful world which could sustain our overcrowding without imploding.

• The necessity of a resourceful earth existing does not guarantee that we could reinstate a safe and secure world.

• Immortality might inspire world leaders to learn to coexist with other nations, enforce free trade and reduce globalization. There will be no “process of elimination” or “survival of the fittest” so poverty would have to cease to exist.
What would life be like, if we lived forever? Consequently, how does our mortality shape our lives?

Naturally this seems at first glance to be a wonderful gift, all people living forever. This would then mean that there would be no illness or disease and that alone would be a great benefit to the so-called “Third World”. All the expense of research and medicine could go to education, reconstruction and redevelopment of impoverished areas and war torn areas in the world and towards what could possibly be the biggest expense, retirement and social security for the elderly. There would also be a larger work force.

However, this utopian dream of living forever would turn into our worst nightmare. Social sectors of the governments of the world would have to represent and support tremendous populations. There would not be enough natural resources such as water, produce and energy. Military research and weapons would have priority over education in terms of investment, which will be sorely needed in a more competitive world. There would be a need to secure the natural resources by each nation. Inevitable threat of war for these resources would detract from our quality of life. There would be a new wave of imperialism to secure the consumer life styles of the developed nations. Education and research for new forms of energy would then be spared, leaving a large number of the world’s population without employment or the ability to compete, without energy and without safety.

Yet this former example does not differ so much from the way the world is today. In a way we are living with the world’s dominant and wealthy nation’s imposition of a shrouded imperialism upon the world’s natural resource rich yet impoverished nations. In any event there is a need to re-examine the dependency that the nations of Africa, South America, the Middle East and Asia has developed with the United States and the nations of Europe. Is it not comparable, a life style of living, consuming as though there were no tomorrow, the idea of living forever?


Counter examples:

• We could imagine that we would become more empowered by immortality, demand more from our leaders, demand more from ourselves. Would we be empathetic if we saw no vulnerability in the other?

• Would we value our lives less if they could never be at risk of death? We could imagine a rise in immoral behavior, as we would not have to be concerned with issues such as AIDS or the crime of murder. Would that immorality be acceptable?

• Imagine if we did all live forever. Would it not be necessary for cultural differences to reduce, as our growing concern would be for the state of the planet?
Is there a possibility, however, that the super powers would rise to the need of a secure world? Would a nation such as the United States, come to understand that government supported education could lead to a fuel independent USA? Would a nation such as the US not depend on poverty to curb it’s own overpopulation if there was no chance of them actually dying off? Would the super powers exercise fair trade and not engage in illegal wars for the sake of global safety?

The people of nations such as the United States would have a lot of re-evaluating to do. It would be a more pressing reality that man would out-live the world. There would be more evidence of poverty all around and the poor would become poorer. It would be necessary to conclude that since all men will live that all men will deserve to live a more comparable life. Imagine if all the wealth of the resources that have been siphoned out of the resource rich nations of Africa went back to the working peoples of those nations? Imagine if there were no tax breaks for the rich or SUV’s on the road? Would it not better our planet, which is already straining against a growing population? Certainly it would be the only way to sustain our Earth and not have us possibly out-live it.

Could it be so that the main focus for the super powers, if we were all immortal, would be to find another inhabitable place in the universe? It would only be the wealthiest people of the wealthiest nations that would have access to such a place, with its resources, etc. We would have to reckon with our Utopian dream becoming a nightmare. Those remaining here on Earth would be left in a living hell.


• The argumentation leads us to consider whether there
could ever be such a thing as Utopia?
• Upon consideration, isn’t it a fit conclusion to a good
life, to pass away?
• Should we not live with the same responsibility if we
could live forever?