Mary Midgley, the nonagenarian philosopher, believes that living forever is overrated: quality of life not quantity is more important <\/p>\n
You've been speaking a lot lately about immortalism. What exactly is this? Immortalism is the idea that not only should life go on getting longer, but that it should go on forever - that medical technology will see to it that we simply don't die. It is a kind of ideology, almost a religion, and is much more prevalent in the US than in the UK. It is in part an overconfidence in technology from the 20th century, and has got mixed up with science fiction. <\/p>\n
Why is the desire to live forever a problem? My charge against immortalism is that it is wasteful - the idealism that gets hooked onto it is going in a useless direction and needs to be deflected. There are too many people already, and you can't put up with an infinite number. Another difficulty is inequality. As things stand, the most privileged would live forever while everybody else would be dying at the normal rate. <\/p>\n
What else are you unhappy about? Even at the pace our lifespan has been increasing, we are beginning to run into trouble. The indignation that people express at not getting their pensions until they're 67 shows that the idea of a life cycle is firmly rooted and may be fairly essential to human life. I'm talking about the degree of activity at different times of life, and that is not something which changes frequently, or that changes much from culture to culture. <\/p>\n
What we respect has also changed: we have a high regard and respect for youth, which makes the situation harder for the old. <\/p>\n
So even without immortalism, is the current lengthening of life problematic? Doctors have a habit of trying to make each individual live a bit longer. I think it runs very deep. They should be given a better idea of health that doesn't necessarily mean living longer. <\/p>\n
How can we reinvent older age? We need to improve quality of life, not quantity. For example, the distribution of work is ridiculous. People in their middle years work far too long and are suddenly expected to stop. Part-time work is a good idea, but it hasn't been fitted into our society half enough. It is very important for women with children but also very important for the old. <\/p>\n
When he found he was dying of cancer, Steve Jobs made this interesting remark, that it was the best thing that ever happened to him because it made his priorities clear. He said nobody wants to die but it is life's best invention, it is the mechanism of change. He had a point. <\/p>\n
What about your life now you are in your 90s? We haven't recovered from the idea that growing old is an awful disaster, which must somehow be put off. I never bought that one. If nothing awful happens to you, you go on doing what you're doing and looking for more. I'm lucky to be in the sort of job I am in, where you can simply go on doing what you like and not be forcibly retired. I've got somewhat feeble and ailing but I haven't got seriously ill. It's the thought of a futile life that is the problem. <\/p>\n
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Read the rest here: Mary Midgley, the nonagenarian philosopher, believes that living forever is overrated: quality of life not quantity is more important You've been speaking a lot lately about immortalism. What exactly is this Continue reading
\nThe wasteful quest for immortality<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"