Please help me /sci/ ;_;

[Anonymous No.7482609]

I'm dying /sci/.
In 50, or 60, or maybe 65 years I will be dead.
What's the best way to make use of the limited time I have left, be happy and make a difference on this world? Thank you for your counsel.

[Anonymous No.7482627]

>>7482609
Death meditation.

[Anonymous No.7482630]

>>7482609
Get off 4chan.

[Anonymous No.7482631]

>>7482609
kill yourself, no more waiting.

[Anonymous No.7482644]

Stop asking retarded philosophical questions to a bunch of fucking neckbeards and do shit you like. Fuck making a difference in the world. Just be happy and fulfilled.

[Anonymous No.7482648]

There is literally nothing bad about dying. The sooner you come to terms with this, the better your life will be.

[Anonymous No.7482652]

Find solace in the fact that your death is beneficial to your species

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senescence

[Anonymous No.7482656]

>>7482652
OP's death probably won't be. I'm not sure OP provides anything but soylent green.

[Anonymous No.7482660]

>>7482656
He's survived thus far, whether by medical miracle or nature itself.

If he can successfully mate with a female (unlikely, given the circumstances) he is biologically successful.
Who am I to interfere with a process multiple millions of years in the making?

[Anonymous No.7482662]

>>7482660
I dunno, I could say the same thing about a random string of digits:

>LOOK HOW BEAUTIFUL 2390829850980378627816432837958034
>So unique! Who am I to interfere with such a special little string of numbers. There's only one like it.

Seems rather specious.

[Anonymous No.7482677]

>>7482648
>nothing bad about death
Except for the whole dying part. With biological evolution in humanity having gone out the window due to technology removing virtually all selection factors, there is literally no reason to die/reproduce.

Why not strive to live for an arbitrarily long period of time?

[Anonymous No.7482696]

>>7482609
No matter how hard You try, whatever do, be it destroy a solar system or create an entire galaxy. It will make no difference, no one will remember You.

[Anonymous No.7482697]

>>7482677
Because biology has selected for such a scenario

An eternal being would long have lost the ability to reproduce. Even somatic immortality would result in gametic mortality, thus a being of immortality is still evolutionary unfavorable

Very few creatures have adopted social evolution, wherein acts that are beneficial to society are beneficial to society. Altruism is a vague and mathematically asymptotic contirbution to society. In layman's terms, one who lives forever contributes nothing socially, but ties up resources creating a negative reproductive value

This, of course, could be modified to include gametic and somatic immortality. Shame that human psychology has that pesky need for purpose in life to prevent suicide...

[Anonymous No.7482700]

>>7482609
google is trying to solve death with calico labs.

[Anonymous No.7482705]

>>7482697
all of that is arbitrary and relies so heavily on mans perception of evolution it means nothing at all

reproduce or don't die or live, none of it actually matters, evolution is not god and doesn't judge you or deam you right or wrong

I tie up resources living right now, everything Ties up resources"

living forever isn't negative or positive its just a possibility

[Anonymous No.7482710]

>>7482700
I view advancement as a sigmoidal curve, wherein advancement to the next "tier" requires exponentially more effort than the previous tier

Thus, I believe society will reach a point where we are technologically capable of creating a new "curve" so to speak. A new universe where individual contribution has meaning rather than the sum of a billion parts representing a small stepping stone to the next tier.
Whether digitally created or physically synthesized is irrelevant considering the limitations of biological memory

In short, immortality sounds fucking awful

[Anonymous No.7482711]

>>7482710
individual contribution is all that has ever mattered. only a handful of men and women have contributed to science and technology the vast majority of humans are useless in that regard, that might change with further schooling but for the most part it wont.

immortality allows for more time to learn and accumulate knowledge in a single organism allowing for greater meta evolution

[Anonymous No.7482712]

>>7482705
See >>7482710

Resources are definitively finite, even in a universal aspect
We are programmed with the constrains of our planet as we have never experienced anything else.
Our limitations are held to the carrying capacity of our planet and dependent upon technological advancement. Thus individual contribution becomes less significant and advancement less rapid.

Will we keep up technologically with our physical growth? I doubt it, but even then, mankind has its limitations

[Anonymous No.7482713]

>>7482710
your post is plain English and yet it makes no sense at all

[Anonymous No.7482714]

>>7482712
dude nothing you say makes any sense

[Anonymous No.7482716]

>>7482711
But to what expense?

To what degree does an individual's cost outweigh a person's output? To what degree do research efforts to expand a person's life outweigh similar efforts to enrich and optimize human eduaction

Eventually, one will be required to exapnd the other as technology becomes more complex but for the time being, which is more valuable?
Research toward immortality or research toward human optimization?

[Anonymous No.7482719]

>>7482713
>>7482714
I would be given an award for those posts had I been a liberal arts major. Truth be told, I'm quite drunk.

The gist is that I (and thousand of people just like me) have spent several years working toward small gains in the sum of science. I have published several times in reputable journals, but to what avail?

Years ago, my efforts would have been monumental advancements in my field; now, trivial contributions.
To progress technologically is becoming more difficult and requires the efforts of more people. The universe is finite and thus has finite resources. An infinite people will eventually utilize more resources than their individual worth

Perhaps we are capable of creating a new universe in which we can restart our grown, where individual contributions have more meaning than they are now given

[Anonymous No.7482720]

>>7482716
the more an individual learns the greater their output becomes with their input remaining the same

its win win

and we are also at the luxury of being able to have enough resources to invest in both endavors of immortality and education at one time.

if it ever came down to choosing you could expand education which would give you greater output and greater means to expand immortality

simple I solved your logic problem

[Anonymous No.7482724]

>>7482719
>>7482719
If we could synthesize all those small gains into one mind it could make greater strides faster than lesser informed individuals

eventually we will need to live longer and learn more to make individual contributions that are still worth a damn

have you ever seen the movie transcendence?

[Anonymous No.7482728]

>>7482720
Much like my hentai folder, as time progresses I accumulate more and more irrelevant hentai.

People desire transexual hentai; alas I only have tentacle hentai. I may have many years' worth of drawn porn but so little is actually applicable to today's needs

So too is the immortal man, for whom the knowledge with no meaning vastly outnumbers that which is relevant

[Anonymous No.7482729]

>>7482720
>>7482724
i'm sorry truth be told im an undergrad and quite dumb

[Anonymous No.7482732]

>>7482728
he could change with the times to stay relevant though not an immediate expert he would have be able to keep stride with any other young new comers around him learning a new thing

[Anonymous No.7482733]

>>7482728
why does the one need to be relevant to the whole anyway? at the core of evolution is the fulfilling of selfish desires, surely the desire to survive for as long as possible is in keeping with evolutionary success correct?

[Anonymous No.7482736]

>>7482729
The saying goes:
"As an undergrad, you think you know everything
With a Master's, you realize you know nothing
With a PhD you realize neither does anyone else"

All we can do is hope to understand more today than we did tomorrow and hope that that the end of our life it meant something.

Only those who do not want to gain understanding are "dumb"

[Anonymous No.7482737]

>>7482728
also, knowledge of the scientific nature of the universe is less likely to change than the trends of some social group thus his accumulation of data will not become antiquated even as minor changes happen over time

[Anonymous No.7482742]

>>7482733
Strictly biologically speaking, once we can no longer reproduce, our value steadily declines to zero

Perhaps in a different biological model, longer life is advantageous but as it stands, the potential for a bright 16 y/o is far greater than that of a bright 60 y/o

As such, if you can not produce bright 16 y/o's what good is a bright 120 y/o?
As a mentor, sure. Altruistically, humans (and other altruistic species) are afforded the advantage of molding the next generation and are given meaning beyond their reproductive boundaries

But when does the knowledge of an 80 y/o outperform the mentoring advantage of a 160 y/o

I suppose I'm trying to say, when have we acquired enough knowledge that most of it is non-applicable?

[Anonymous No.7482745]

>>7482733
You don't understand natural selection at all

[Anonymous No.7482746]

>>7482742
sorry im going to bed so I cant keep talking

[Anonymous No.7482750]

>>7482742
Omitting the effects of aging, I doubt your point still holds. Obviously, if you work in one place for too long, you stagnate, but changing careers every so often should prevent this entirely.

[Anonymous No.7482760]

>>7482750
The beauties of an infinitely capable mind!

If everyone is immortal, why should I find myself both an unusually gifted molecular biologist and zoologist? Is there truly nobody (much less a sizable group of people) born within 100 years who are more capable than I?

An immortal being is somewhat stuck in his niche. A 1000 y/o endocrinologist is still 20 years less relevant than a 1020 y/o endocrinologist despite only being less than 2% less skilled
Better that we spend our time optimizing a billion people to perform at a world-class standard for 200 years than piddle away at making infinitely capable humans that live forever

Perhaps I'm just limited by my defeatist aspect on life, though...

[Anonymous No.7482765]

>>7482696
Not everyone cares about their legacy. Some care, you know, about not dying.

[Anonymous No.7482784]

Go blow yourself up in Mecca, or at the Dome of Rock in Jerusalem.

[Anonymous No.7482785]

>>7482784
Or at the Mag Dolands :DDDD

[Anonymous No.7482787]

>>7482785
Fucking communists trying to make AMERICANS eat vegetettatbebeElles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.7482821]

>>7482696
and that's what makes the struggle for greatness such an admirable thing