{"id":183,"date":"2014-07-28T16:23:25","date_gmt":"2014-07-28T16:23:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/kohette.com\/wpthemes\/literatum\/?p=183"},"modified":"2023-05-02T14:54:19","modified_gmt":"2023-05-02T14:54:19","slug":"how-humans-will-respond-to-immortality-an-interview-with-philosopher-john-fischer-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/?p=183","title":{"rendered":"How\u00a0Respond to Immortality: An Interview with Philosopher John Fischer"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Five million dollars is a hefty grant for any academic to receive, let alone a philosopher. And yet that\u2019s exactly what UC Riverside philosophy professor John Martin Fischer<\/a> received last year for a project that will involve dozens of scientists, philosophers, and theologians from around the world to examine a subject that is probably unknowable: immortality.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

With a subject as ephemeral and amorphous as immortality, one wonders what answers we can reasonably expect for the $5 million price tag. Fischer doesn\u2019t propose to determine whether god exists (he is, himself, a non-believer) or heaven is real. But there\u2019s plenty to work with. Human immortality is a broad subject. It is science and religion. It is futurism and conservatism. It comprises biology, cybernetics, philosophy, theology, cosmology, and quantum physics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The scope of The Immortality Project<\/a> reflects that boundlessness. On June 1, Fischer and a panel of judges will announce their choice of 10 winning proposals offered by physical scientists from around the world, each of whom will receive about $250,000. Judges are still sifting through the roughly 75 proposals they\u2019ve received. But Fischer gave a few indications of what we might expect in a phone interview I conducted with him last week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One scientist, he said, has proposed to study the hydra<\/a>, whose cells replicate indefinitely without deteriorating; several others would examine the neurophysiology of the near-death experience. \u201cThere are some interesting proposals looking at how people\u2019s beliefs about the afterlife affect certain things like their ethical behavior, their criminal behavior,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Other projects might examine \u201cthe relationship between afterlife beliefs and economic behavior and longevity,\u201d he added. \u201cThere\u2019s a lot of really interesting stuff out there.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The hard science is just part of the inquiry. In June 2014, judges will disburse a second allotment of $1.5 million among a group of philosophers and theologians to think and write about immortality\u2019s more rarefied aspects. (The remaining million pays for administrative costs like maintaining a website and organizing conferences). Fischer hopes to have the project, which is funded by the John Templeton Foundation, wrapped up for a culminating conference in the summer of 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I chatted with Fischer for over an hour about the project. As expected, the conversation got pretty meta.<\/p>\n\n\n

In your writings, you use logic to dispute the idea of god; there\u2019s also a deep, implicit acceptance of the reality of death. How did that lead you to want to study immortality? It seems antithetical to those conclusions.<\/p>\n\n\n

The context that I\u2019m interested is death and what comes after death\u2014if anything\u2014in all its aspects. The basically secular view is what I\u2019ve adopted in many of my writings, which says that when we die we go out of existence. We don\u2019t have any further experiences. [But if we assume] death is a bad thing for the individual who dies\u2014even if it\u2019s just experiential nothingness\u2014then one might wonder whether immortality might well be a good alternative. That\u2019s how they fit together in my mind.<\/p>\n\n\n

You\u2019ve said several proposals under review would examine the near-death experience. I actually thought we had closed the door on that. Neurologist Kevin Nelson, in his book, The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain, suggests phenomena like the light at the end of the tunnel and hallucinations are all about reduced blood flow, among other things. In the research you\u2019re planning will you assume the phenomena are physiological or are you leaving the door open to the supernatural?<\/p>\n\n\n

There are some people who take it that near-death experiences provide evidence of the falsity of materialism about the mind. They take it that near-death experiences provide a glimpse into an afterlife. They actually take it that these near-death experiences provide good evidence that we have to adopt a completely new paradigm of the mind and consciousness. I\u2019m inclined to the view that there will be adequate neurophysiological explanations of all the phenomena. I don\u2019t think we\u2019re there yet. I don\u2019t think we have them yet, they\u2019re just hypotheses.<\/p>\n

\n

That there was a beginning to the universe doesn\u2019t really affect the issue of immortality. But that there must at some point be an end to the universe\u2014it\u2019s hard to get one\u2019s mind around.<\/h3>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But I think where we are now is kind of exciting because I think everybody agrees that people are sincere about their reports. They have these experiences and the question is \u201cwhat do they mean?\u201d or \u201cwhat do they indicate?\u201d I\u2019m open to the possibility that we won\u2019t be able to fully explain it. But my default assumption is naturalistic and scientific, and I would like to see more and more understanding\u2014a better understanding of the underlying brain processes in these experiences.<\/p>\n\n\n

Does the news about the Higgs boson\u2014specifically its implication that the known universe may have an expiration date\u2014shape your thoughts about immortality?<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

My view is, first of all, it doesn\u2019t bother me at all that there was a beginning to the universe. That doesn\u2019t really affect the issue of immortality. But that there must at some point be an end to the universe\u2014it\u2019s hard to get one\u2019s mind around. It seems like the heat death would take place many billion years from now.I should first say that I\u2019m not an expert on physics and I don\u2019t fully understand the implications of the Higgs boson discovery, although, you know, people do talk about limits on the temporal extension\u2014they talk about the sun flickering out eventually or heat death.<\/p>\n

And I\u2019m assuming the constraints of the Higgs boson also would take place billions and billions of years from now. So I\u2019m of the opinion that, instead of strict immortality, we could focus on extreme longevity\u2014billions and billions of years of longevity. And I think the same issues would come up.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

Yeah, billions of years is a long time\u2014pretty much inconceivable.<\/p>\n\n\n

The debate would reinscribe itself. So people would say \u201cyes, that would be great,\u201d they would want it. Others would say \u201cno, it would be inevitably boring or alienating or not a recognizably human life.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n

Is it conceivable that there\u2019s a version of immortality that exists as something outside the limits of the known universe, or do you have to be religious to believe that?<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

I guess you wouldn\u2019t have to be religious. You could believe that there are forces or energies or features of the physical universe which we haven\u2019t yet identified or can\u2019t yet fully describe\u2014that there was a kind of [true] immortality that wouldn\u2019t have to be religious. That\u2019s possible. It\u2019s kind of an abstract possibility that we can\u2019t really grasp concretely right now. But I think it\u2019s possible and there\u2019s lots that we don\u2019t know.<\/p>\n

If you think about quantum mechanics and string theory and you try wrap your mind around the possibility that there are many, many dimensions to reality, not just three or four, it starts becoming very hard to comprehend. We have certain concepts of present, past, future, causation, physical objects, acceleration, velocity, location. We apply those ordinary concepts to our ordinary lives and they work pretty well, you know? But once you start thinking about quantum mechanics, string theory, the ordinary concepts just don\u2019t apply anymore. And maybe there is a kind of immortality that we have genuinely as part of the physical universe that we can\u2019t yet understand.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

Or even beyond the physical universe\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n

Yeah, beyond the physical universe that we know about. There are philosophers who are dualists who think that the mind is not identical to the brain. Or, if they\u2019re property dualists, they think that mental properties are non-physical properties of our brains. And if you think that maybe the universe has non-physical properties, maybe immortality is somehow related to those.<\/p>\n\n\n

Is there a basic incompatibility between free will and immortality? And I mean true immortality, not putting my brain in a jar for extreme longevity.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

Well, I\u2019m going to answer another question first, then I\u2019ll get back to your question. I definitely think that immortality in the sense of living forever and not dying is completely consistent with free will. Now, if you add that determinism is true or that god exists then it might rule out certain kinds of freedom but I think it\u2019s still consistent with other kinds of freedom and it\u2019s consistent with moral responsibility. Now, true immortality, especially as conceptualized in a religious view\u2014I don\u2019t think that\u2019s typically thought of as involving free will.<\/p>\n

\n

There are some people who take it that near-death experiences provide evidence of the falsity of materialism about the mind. I\u2019m inclined to the view that there will be adequate neurophysiological explanations of all the phenomena.<\/h3>\n<\/blockquote>\n

If you think about the standard Christian picture, in which you\u2019ve been virtuous in life and you go to heaven and you have eternal union with god, that\u2019s typically not a context in which you have freedom of the will. You\u2019re in a blissful union with god forever, but you don\u2019t have the freedom to choose evil. You\u2019re not conceptualized as planning and acting in accordance with your plans.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s different in Buddhist views and Hindu views where you have reincarnation\u2014where after you die you still live a life and you can have free will. The Islamic picture is the garden. It\u2019s very sumptuous and lavish with fountains and sensual pleasures. I\u2019m not enough of an Islamic scholar to know if you\u2019re supposed to be acting with free will there or just enjoying great sensual pleasures, but it\u2019s a different kind of picture from heaven. Heaven in the Judeo-Christian tradition is more of an intellectual or thetic realm.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

Isn\u2019t the dualistic Christian notion of heaven and hell just an attempt to reconcile the idea of free will here on earth with the idea of immortality?<\/p>\n\n\n

Yes. I think that\u2019s correct. But what\u2019s interesting here is, you know, there are these more complicated pictures where on some views you have an opportunity to exercise your free will even after you die.<\/p>\n\n\n

It sounds great.<\/p>\n\n\n

It\u2019s kind of interesting because, on the Christian picture, free will is such a central part of the importance and meaningfulness of our lives on earth. It\u2019s really what distinguishes us from mere animals. It\u2019s interesting that heaven\u2019s supposed to be an ideal place and yet heaven does not contain that feature that is so important to the meaningfulness of our lives. When we get to the next round of competition, maybe someone will explore that issue.<\/p>\n\n\n

I wrote a story recently which showed that neurons\u2014like the hydra \u2014may live indefinitely when unattached to the mortal confines of their host bodies, a discovery that seems to bring that brain-in-a-jar scenario a bit closer. Futurists like Ray Kurzweil believe we will have achieved immortality\u2014or at least super-long term longevity\u2014 in about 40 years. What do you think?<\/p>\n\n\n

I\u2019m very interested in this and it\u2019s definitely within the scope of the grant. We have proposals on jellyfish, hydra and related biological creatures. There are also interesting studies of certain worms that reproduce asexually. And so biologists are looking at these creatures with the possibility of making discoveries that could help us cure aging. Kurzweil isn\u2019t really a biologist; he\u2019s a futurist and an entrepreneur. But, yes, he\u2019s a big proponent of supplementation and enhancements of various kinds\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n

Yes, cybernetics\u2014couldn\u2019t that be part of this picture?<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

Yes, eventually. Kurzweil and others believe that at some point we will have achieved a biological status where we could still be run over by a truck or hit by a meteorite or die in a fire but we would be medically immortal. We wouldn\u2019t age or die of natural causes. And, once we get to that point, we\u2019ll be able to live long enough that eventually we\u2019ll be able to upload the contents of our minds into computers or cybernetic devices.<\/p>\n

I, myself, am skeptical that this will be achieved in the near future. I think 40 years is probably optimistic. I\u2019m also humble enough about these things to know that we\u2019ve been wrong before about the possibility of scientific progress. But I am struck by the fact that you can go in for a simple operation and it can go wrong. So I\u2019m a bit more skeptical.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Heaven: Nice place to visit, lousy place to stay for all eternity if you value free will. Image via Wikimedia Commons<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n

Good point. But let\u2019s assume we do achieve biological immortality someday. It seems like any individual action we perform would matter a lot less. Does it in some way absolve us our moral responsibilities toward one another if we all live forever?<\/p>\n\n\n

No, it doesn\u2019t at all. I think that if we could all live forever we would still have to treat each other with respect and dignity. It would still be wrong to cause people pain and suffering or violate their right to privacy or religious expression or freedom of speech. I think ethics in basic ways wouldn\u2019t change. If I know I\u2019m medically immortal and I know others\u2014maybe my friends or maybe everyone is like that\u2014it doesn\u2019t make it ok for me to treat them like dirt or to violate their rights or cause them pain.<\/p>\n\n\n

And when we talk about biological immortality, we often talk about it as though it would be accessible to everyone all at once. But I always think about how much sharper the class divide might be if some humans could afford to become immortal while others couldn\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

That\u2019s an excellent point. Since forever, human beings have wanted immortality. It literally goes back to the first epic that\u2019s ever been written, the Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh lost his friend Enkidu, who died, and Gilgamesh went on a quest for the secret to immortality. We\u2019ve always wanted it. But there\u2019s also been a counter-narrative that it\u2019s overreaching, that it\u2019s asking for too much, it\u2019s not reasonable.<\/p>\n

\n

I, myself, am skeptical that biological immortality will be achieved in the near future. I am struck by the fact that you can go in for a simple operation and it can go wrong.<\/h3>\n<\/blockquote>\n

One part of the reflection on immortality is the realization that it\u2019s not really feasible for everyone to have it. Because if everyone had it there would be overpopulation. If everyone were immortal and their children were immortal there would be no resources left, there would be overcrowding. You can tell stories about colonies on other planets but, short of that, it seems like there would be constraints toward just having an elite or small group of immortal people. And that raises questions about equity and fairness and class.<\/p>\n

I look at a genre like the vampire genre as bringing this out because the vampires are achieving immortality at the expense of others. They\u2019re exploiting others to get immortality. It brings up questions about justice and fairness in achieving immortality in a metaphorical way.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

One imagines a kind of scenario where humans who gain immortality begin believing they are somehow more human than the poor schlubs who can\u2019t. I worry that some humans become more expendable than they were before. They\u2019re better cannon fodder for wars. Better for to shine the immortals\u2019 shoes.<\/p>\n\n\n

Say more about that\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n

Well, suppose immortality is available only to a certain economic, cultural and social elite\u2014basically the people who can afford it and who have access. We\u2019re not talking about people in the slums of Mumbai and we\u2019re also not talking about people in the project towers here in Brooklyn.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

Well that\u2019s right. Just as a matter of fact there are people who are seeking immortality through cryogenics in America and it\u2019s very expensive. I don\u2019t know exactly how much, but it tends to be sought by very wealthy people. There are a lot of billionaires from Texas who want cryogenics. People in the inner cities or the slums of Mumbai are not going to be able to afford all that\u2019s required for cryogenics. Also, they\u2019re not going to be able to afford anti-aging medicine, supplementation, all the medicines people take to lower their cholesterol to ideal levels and everything.<\/p>\n

But there\u2019s another thing: The rich tend to have lives that they really want to continue. The poor have generally taken refuge in a different kind of idea, and that is the afterlife. With Christianity, that\u2019s been one of the great things about it as an institution. It\u2019s given hope to the downtrodden. If you think of the African-American church in America, it\u2019s a great example of giving hope in the face of poverty and injustice. But the hope is not to live forever and not die. The hope is to have an afterlife in which justice is achieved.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The vampire: Metaphor for the rich, immortals that will one day enslave us proles. Image by Freddy R. Ortiz via deviantART<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n

And the elite become, like a vampire, something of a different\u2014albeit humanoid\u2014species. An immortal human is, at least in a fundamental or philosophical way, a different species, right?<\/p>\n\n\n

Yes.<\/p>\n\n\n

You\u2019ve written about death as being \u201cbad\u201d because it deprives us of things we know we will enjoy. But is it possible that one reason we enjoy things is that we know they won\u2019t last? I think of Dorian Gray\u2019s constant ennui. Proust writes a lot about the dissatisfaction in love that comes right after one possesses the object of his desire. Would we even enjoy immortality after a while?<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

Yes. Well\u2026that\u2019s a great question. I think Heidegger is famous also for arguing that our awareness of our own finitude structures our lives, kind of gives it meaning, makes everything precious and urgent. And that, without it, our lives wouldn\u2019t have that meaningfulness. I think that insofar as you really love someone\u2014really, intensely, genuinely love someone\u2014you don\u2019t want to lose that person. You don\u2019t want it to end. And you\u2019ll go to great lengths to maintain the beauty and intimacy of the relationship and not let it dissipate and not let it end.<\/p>\n

I think love has in it kind of an internal logic or impetus to continue. It\u2019s so painful when you break up with someone you love or you lose a friend. And it\u2019s so painful because you want it to last forever. There\u2019s this very poignant phenomenon, and it\u2019s very anecdotal, but I\u2019ve definitely heard of various instances of it, and that is when people who have been married for a long time, when one of the members of a couple dies it\u2019s not uncommon for the other one to die shortly thereafter for no apparent physical reason. They die from heartbreak, basically.<\/p>\n

\n

The whole idea that somehow love would dissipate if we were immortal, I don\u2019t accept that.<\/h3>\n<\/blockquote>\n

There is a lot of beauty and dignity to human beings and to great love. My father recently passed away and I watched my mother take care of him for a long time. And there\u2019s just an incredible beauty to that. And the whole idea that somehow love would dissipate if we were immortal, I don\u2019t accept that.<\/p>\n

In a finite life, yes, there are challenges already\u2014big challenges in keeping a relationship vital and passionate. Even couples who love each other very much often fall into patterns and habits and take each other for granted. So that would also be a challenge in an immortal life. You\u2019d have to work on it, just like you\u2019d have to work on it in a finite life.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

Love isn\u2019t a metaphor here: it\u2019s a specific reason to want to keep living forever.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n

I think it\u2019s one of the great reasons for living. It\u2019s clearly one of the central ways in which our lives get meaning and more richness and become more rewarding for us. I think if we couldn\u2019t have love and intimate friends in an immortal life, that would really be a problem. But, if we can, you could even imagine the same intimate friends or the same spouse forever.<\/p>\n

Think about this: It\u2019s so painful to lose someone you\u2019ve known as a friend or a lover you\u2019ve been together with for 30 or 40 years, imagine how it would be to lose someone if you\u2019ve been together hundreds of years or thousands of years. That would give more incentive to work at your marriages and your friendships in an immortal life.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n

Caring about life, per se, doesn\u2019t really mean anything. The only life worth living is a life with love in it\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n

Yes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Five million dollars is a hefty grant for any academic to receive, let alone a philosopher. And yet that\u2019s exactly what UC Riverside philosophy professor John Martin Fischer received last year for a project that will involve dozens of scientists, philosophers, and theologians from around the world to examine a subject that is probably unknowable: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":592,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"template-simple.php","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,7,8,11,13],"tags":[31,34],"class_list":["post-183","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interviews","category-lifestyle","category-nature","category-science","category-technology","tag-inmortality","tag-life"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=183"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":760,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183\/revisions\/760"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/592"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=183"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=183"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kcsnowbourne.webstead.nl\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=183"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}