It is well known that the medical sciences have managed increase both the quantity and the quality of our lives in recent years. While it is a commendable task to lessen the suffering experienced by the elderly, we must not seek to avoid death at all costs. The two texts offer wildly different views concerning our pursuit of longer lives. Ultimately, the idealistic view of immortality and transcendence ignores our rightful place as part of the natural world.
The first text presents a strong critique of recent medical trends to prolong life. Population growth is already causing the natural world to burst at the seams. Ecological destruction, resource depletion and food shortages are directly linked to the increasing number of people on the planet. Striving for longevity will surely exacerbate these problems. Moreover, isn’t it a waste of resources to focus on this issue at the expense of other, more pressing concerns such as climate change, food resources and inequality?
The second text approaches this issue from an idealistic point of view. Science fiction often becomes reality and the notion of immortality has been a subject of fascination for years. However it ignores some crucial concerns. For one, life isn’t merely about length. Many would argue that a short, fulfilling life is better than a long, empty one. I agree with this point, we can’t just focus on the number of years we live. Far more effective, not to mention ethically acceptable, would be to invest time and energy into how we spend our lives.
To conclude, the issue of prolonging life is a contentious one. Undoubtedly, we want to age gracefully and as painlessly as possible, but ultimately we must die in order the make way for the next generation. The pursuit of immortality ignores more pressing issues such as the difficulties already encountered due to large population and neglects the importance of a fulfilling, as opposed to a long, life.
Comments