It matters which stories we tell ourselves. Narrative templates structure our knowledge of the world and help us make sense of the situations we find ourselves in... Traditionally, stories about aging have typically focused on the need for graceful accommodation. The recommended solution to diminishing vigor and impending death was resignation coupled with an effort to achieve closure in our personal relationships and in our practical affairs. Given that there was nothing that anybody could do to prevent or retard aging, this focus made sense. Rather than fretting about the inevitable, it was wiser to concentrate on wrapping things up and aim for peace of mind. Today, our situation is different... Stories and ideologies that council passive acceptance of aging are now no longer harmless sources of consolation. They are reckless and dangerous impediments to urgently needed action.This fable clarifies the issues and ethics of life extension. Don't miss this. Here's my comments on these issues back in February. Posted by Stephen Gordon at April 22, 2004 09:52 AM | TrackBack
Great story. I like the little kid who comes out and says that the dragon is bad. We need that kid.
Posted by: Phil at April 22, 2004 04:57 PMI like Nick's web page. So much stuff that interests me. If only I didnt have to sleep! So many sites, so little time!
Posted by: Kathy at April 22, 2004 08:16 PMIt's a great story - we need more of these transhumanist fables :)
Posted by: Reason at April 23, 2004 01:45 AMOnly problem I see with the story is the bit about the King. He'd become too important to feed to the dragon. Further, too many bureaucrats had a stake in the trains. I'd expect that they'd sabotage any strike against the Dragon because they'll realize (even if just unconciously) it's their jobs at stake. Ultimately, I think the problem with this story is that the government was necessary to kill the dragon.
If we look at the historical record, government science has only worked when a vital national interest was at stake. A couple of examples would be the scientific advancement of the 18th and 19th centuries that supported the commerce empire of the UK, or the Manhattan project of the US and UK during the Second World War.
In comparison, fission and fusion energy has been a collective embarrassment. I doubt that the public would be so afraid of nuclear power if it weren't for the vast quantity of public funds squandered over the years on substandard fission plants worldwide. And it's only been in the last ten years that a couple of the most significant problems has been addressed. First, that one needs to store a couple of years of fuel in the reactor, and second, how to dispose of the reactive waste?
Space flight is another example. Why is NASA, the ESA, Russia (?), the Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and Brazilian counterparts so focused on having their own publically owned and inefficiently operated launch capability at the expense of their businesses?
My point is that natural aging is a problem that easily could justify the expenditure for the US alone of hundreds of billions of dollars per year, but for which the current infrastructure seems incapable of managing.
309 Get your online poker fix at http://www.onlinepoker-dot.com
Posted by: online poker at August 15, 2004 07:42 PM