The idea of extending life challenges the circle of life: we come into this world, we live, and we leave. It is not right for people to go against that law and it is completely unethical. Radical life extension poses many threats to our society and would disrupt our way of life.
This idea has many disadvantages, especially to low income classes. This practice would emphasize the problems we already have with health care and treatments that prolong life and would set the gap between economic classes even more than it is today (Andersen). Sooner or later life extension will only be available to the upper class and all of the lower class will continue dying at, what is now, a normal age.
Radical life extension also diminishes the worth of life.
Dvorsky quotes Mckibben when he says that life would be meaningless without death and that the human race would lose the sense of sacrifice. The shortness of our life is what motivates us to accomplish all that we can with the time that we are given. He even goes on to say that it would take the honor out of life. There would be no reason to fight for your own country or lay down your life for someone, because who wants to shorten this newfound longevity of life? Without the knowing that death is not too far off, society will become relaxed and ungrateful for the life that they have been given.
We would start to become bored with our lives because eventually days would become routines and life would ultimately become boring as opposed to life how we know it now, knowing that we have a time limit to accomplish the things that we want to.
When speaking of this practice some people use the word “posthuman.” They say that radical life expansion decreases the worth of life and that eventually t...
... middle of paper ...
...ss. "Radical Life Extension Raises Complex Social, Economic, and Political Issues." Extending the Human Lifespan. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Radical Life Extension Is Already Here, But We're Doing It Wrong." The Atlantic (21 May 2012). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
Blow, Charles M. "Radical Life Extension." New York Times 8 Aug. 2013: NA(L). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
Dvorsky, George. "Radical Life Extension: An Overview." Extending the Human Lifespan. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Popular Arguments For and Against Longevity." IEET.com. 2007. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
Wade, Nicholas. "Arguments over life and the need for death." New York Times 7 Mar. 2000: F4. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
Beauchamp, T. 1999, ‘The Beginning and End of Life’ in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, eds Walters, L. & Beauchamp, T., Wadsworth, Belmont CA, pp. 94-98.
In an expanding scientific field, where do the possibilities of extending the natural human life end? Business Insider author Erin Brodwin illustrates just this in her article titled A surgeon aiming to do the first human head transplant says ‘Frankenstein’ predicted a crucial part of the surgery. Sergio Canavero, a neurosurgeon from Italy, states that he intends to be the first scientist to successfully carry out what numerous surgeons deem a radical experiment- a human head transplant. Plans to carry out said surgery are well underway, as Canavero already has a willing recipient for the operation. The source of this article is Business Insider, which is considered a legitimate news source. Therefore, there is little reason to further question
"A Pro-life Perspective Essays on Life Issues - Abortion,Euthanasia, Suicide by Diane Dew."A Pro-life Perspective Essays on Life Issues - Abortion,Euthanasia, Suicide by Diane Dew. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. .
Opposing Viewpoints."Introduction to Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints." Euthanasia. Ed. Carrie Snyder. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2000. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 18 Nov. 2011. http://ic.galegroup.com.library.collin.edu/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Reference&disableHighlighting=false&prodId=OVIC&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010134107&userGroupName=txshracd2497&jsid=af2eacb374dfea6a89c0773d16c35a50
Life and death represent a dyad; their definitions inherently depend on one another. Simply defined, death is the cessation of life. Similarly, life can be defined as not death; however, not everything not alive is dead. Boniolo and Di Fiore explain this dyadic relationship well, and other authors have cited this interdependency to better define life and death.1-6 The academic literature contains multiple definitions for both terms depending on which discipline or interest group attempts the definition. Nair-Collins provides a thorough discourse on this diversity in terms of death, differentiating between “biological death, death of the person, death of the moral agent, death of the moral patient, legal death, and the commonsense notion of death.”2(p.667,668,675) Through the dyadic relationship, similar groupings could be arrived at for defining life. Whether or not one accepts Nair-Collins’ categories, at least some differentiation of this type is necessary given the complexity of these concepts. I propose a simplified categorization of the definitions of life and death: (1)scientific/biological, (2)medic...
Common sense seems to dictate that we are all going to die one day. As we all get older we crave to keep our youth, and to stay young forever is the ultimate dream. The thought of a possible immortality is just an added benefit. Even though we have strived towards this goal for centuries, have we obtained advances in successfully staying young forever? In Bill Gifford’s book “Spring Chicken: Stay Young Forever (Or Die Trying)” he explores these ideas of life and aging further. In this novel, he goes on a journey to try and debunk the mysteries and questions behind the new science of aging. He gathers information from tests and scientists from around the country to discover what really works to prevent or delay aging and what is just a hopeful hoax. He helps us figure out why we age and why aging
There are a number of benefits to be found from thinking about ageing as a lifelong process and not just one that affects older people. This essay will define some of these benefits whilst backing up this reasoning with reference to the K118 material. It will then explain briefly which experiences I have had personally which have led me to responding to the question in this manner.
Lee, Robert. "Deserving to Die." Taking Sides. Comp. Kurt Finsterbusch. Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2004. Print.
Exploring Lifespan Development (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Levy-Hinte, J. & Sons, J. London, M. (Producer), & Hardwicke, C. (Director). (2003). The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary'.
Keown, John. "The Value of Human Life." Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. 39. Print.
McCullough, Colleen. "Why I Oppose Euthanasia." The Weekend Australian 16-17 Mar. 1996. http://www.ucaqld.com.au/trendz/3ethics/oppose.htm (27 Feb. 1997)
"Individuals Do Not Have a Right to Die." Opposing Viewpoints Digests: Euthanasia. Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Harford Technical High School - MD. 15 Mar. 2010 .
Berger, K. S. (2010). Invitation to The Life Span (Second Edition). Unite State of America: Worth Publishers.
death (pp.166-172). In C. Levine (Ed.), Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial bioethical issues (10th ed.). Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill
Transhumanism is described as a cultural movement that believes the human “condition should be upgraded by genetic engineering and neural prostheses into a new type of human”(Belaunde V. ,2009 pg.2). In order words the use of technology in order to suppress the mental and physical limitations of humans, such as aging or loss of a lost limb. The issue of transhumanism has been debated over the years and is still being questioned by many scientist and religious authorities.The answer to question of rather using this technologies is ethical ‘right or wrong’ is more uncertain today than in previous generations.