Suppose that science have achieve immortality for humans (whatever the mean for this).

What would be philosophical consequence? — John Pingo

Great old Twilight Zone. Guy sells his soul to the Devil for immortality. He is allowed to live as long as he wants, and he can die and turn over his soul any time he says so. Of course he thinks he never will.

He engages in risky behavior, jumps in front of subway trains, drinks ammonia. Nothing happens to him. He gets bored. He fights with his wife and throws her off the roof of a building. Of course he's not worried, he's going to get the death penalty and they can't kill him. Instead he gets a lawyer intent on saving him, and he gets life in prison. As he's sitting there in his cell contemplating spending eternity in his miserable prison cell, he summons the Devil and asks to die.

We'd have no excuse not to get our act together....

We'd have no excuse not to get our act together.... — Tom Storm

We'd have every excuse. It's mortality that makes us get our butts in gear. "I'll do it next millennium."

Maybe.

"Immortality?"

:point: Firstly, the death of religion, then we'd merge with (be uplifted by) artificial intelligence and perhaps, in the end, attain transcension...

:up:

Suppose that science have achieve immortality for humans (whatever the mean for this).

What would be philosophical consequence? — John Pingo

It depends on what immortality is. If it means continuing to live without the requisite necessities - basic needs, ambition, relationships, and curiosity which what drive humans to make the effort and time to get -- then philosophy is not the one to turn to. These humans are as good as dead without curiosity and the will to know.

I think that any idea of immortality, as in conventional ideas of life after death, or ones created in a transhumanist vision, raise the question of what that life would be like. I think that it is possible to fear death in relation to the death of the personal ego, and in terms of attachment to being alive.

On the other hand, if one was in the predicament of being alive 'forever' what would one aim for? Would it be about heaven of endless delight, or the torment of having struggle perpetually? Even if death was not likely if one was living in a physical body, food and somewhere to live would still be needed. Would people have to work forever more? I don't see how the ideal of immortality would be worthwhile unless it was in some kind of utopian reality, because people struggle with suffering enough as it is in the course of the natural lifestyle.

For a mortal person, suicide means actually dying.

For an immortal person, suicide is simply wanting to be mortal! When an immortal person commits suicide, s/he doesn't have to die, s/he just has to want to die (desire a mortal life).

Our lot should be considered immortals who've committed suicide.

Suppose that science have achieve immortality for humans (whatever the mean for this).
What would be philosophical consequence? — John Pingo

Interesting assumption. Only that you maybe forgot about the overpopulation that will ensue! :smile:
But if we also assume that science finds also a way for our resources to become unlimited and save our planet from destruction or that we'll be able to spread the population of Earth to other planets, then philosophy will be greaty benefited because the persons involved in it will have much more time to come with more plausible, fruitful and useful answers on life and the universe. Because, even if someone is influenced and continues the work of a great philosopher after he has left, it's not the same thing as if that philosopher were still alive and active in the field.

immortality is impossible because even if you cured ageing you will still eventually get hit by a bus or something

It's mortality that makes us get our butts in gear. — fishfry

"I should start this big project, which will take at least 5 years to complete, and it is the possibility that I could die tomorrow that motivates me to complete said project."

-- Said noone ever.

Suppose that science have achieve immortality for humans (whatever the mean for this).

What would be philosophical consequence? — John Pingo

Hellish boredom.

Immortality isn't a desideratum if resurrection is an option!

According to Thomistic view, as it is shown here, soul is immortal, and body will be resurrected:

you will still eventually get hit by a bus — Miller

Better than being thrown under the bus by your "friend", oui?

If you die young, does that mean you got your wish - eternal youth? If it's all wordplay, genies must exist, not in bottles or lamps, or is that a quibble too?

No man means all he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous. — Henry Adams

Before that, we need to know which immortality you are talking about and maybe how exactly science would do that to.
One way would be if we could extend our telomeres, which shorten as chromosomes continue to divide until they can no longer do so.
I am not any expert, i just read an article on google. So i dunno if this would also reverse aging.
But my guess is that it probably would otherwise, is it really immortality?
This should be enough for an idea as to how exactly we would achieve immortality.

BUT we can still be killed and would still age. We would just be able to reverse it.

What would be the philosophical implications of such an immortality?

I don't think technology and transhumanism will ever be able to guarantee immortality but I think it will offer more and more longevity of individual human lifespan. I think our best hope for now, is in the development of anti-aging drugs, based on knowledge of the human genome.
From my limited reading on the subject based mostly on articles in New Scientist, I think that the current claim is that the first human to live to and age between 125 and 170 is alive today.

I think we actually have to turn to the sci-fi shows to get projections of what kind of technologies might exist in the future. I found the one in the remake series of Battlestar Gallactica, interesting.
The idea was that the Cylons were created by humans and then rebelled and destroyed most of humanity but they also became able to create Cylons who were just like humans. If one got killed then its 'conscience' was downloaded to a new cloned body. There were 6 main human models, so lots of identical versions of you would be walking around but they would all be living quite different lives.
If an individual unit was killed when it was too far away from its 'resurrection ship,' then it would truly die.
I simply projected this onto humans with, well, if the Cylons can do this then why can't humans in the very very distant future.
I like the idea that humans might eventually have death reduced to a human rational choice.