Just Finished Reading: Immortality – The Quest to Live Forever and How It Drives Civilisation by Stephen Cave (FP: 2012) [307pp] 

Here the author makes a rather sweeping proposition – that THE drive to civilisation since its very beginnings has been the unending search for ways to live forever. That’s quite the idea, so I was intrigued to see if he could pull it off.  

Essentially, he split the idea of immortality into four separate threads which each giving rise to different expansions of technology, ideas or beliefs each of which helped shape the world we inhabit. The first, logically, is actual physical immortality with the body and mind you were born with – mostly. This is the process where health is the primary outcome depending on medicine, vaccinations, food security and so on. Clearly such things might enhance longevity somewhat but not enough to live beyond our normal span. This means going further with progressively intrusive medical procedures, technological enhancements etc.. Going further still we have ideas such as transferring the human brain into indestructible robot bodies or ‘uploading’ minds into machines. Each step extends life a little, or a lot, further into the future. 

Then we have bodily reincarnation after death with the hope (dream?) of being brought back by future technical means or within a spiritual belief system. The next link in the chain encompasses various beliefs in ‘souls’ that are the essential you which, after bodily death, migrate into another reality or in some way re-engage with the material world for another round of life. Finally, we have the idea of living in the memories and culture of future generations as an historical figure through stories, icons and monuments left behind. 

Although the author does make some case for his thesis I don’t think he quite brings it off. I’d certainly go so far as saying that the idea of living forever – by whatever means – could be seen as ‘A’ driver behind various scientific endeavours and religious or philosophical belief systems I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to say it is ‘THE’ driver. On top of that I had a problem throughout by how the author defined immortality itself – taking it to the extreme with it meaning essentially outliving the Universe itself trillions of years hence with its predicted heat death. Personally, if someone could live for 10 THOUSAND years never mind 10 TRILLION years, I’d say that they’re as good as immortal at that point. 

But is immortality – ignoring the religious side of things – even possible? I think it's possible (or at least conceivable) that science can extend life a great deal. Even with present technology an average life expectancy of 100 years is achievable. Even something like 125-150 healthy years is probably not beyond us. Going much further will probably demand some radical breakthroughs beyond cloned organs and so on. With complete cloned bodies (or their replacing by – for want of a better term – androids) and an ‘uploaded’ consciousness we should be able to live a great deal longer. The only question would be – is that REALLY you? Is a copy of you – which is what we’re talking about here – really YOU isn’t just a philosophical question. It may look like you and might even feel like you from the inside but it's still a simulacrum. Somehow, I’m not sure if we can even get that far even in the reasonably far future – but who knows? This was an interesting dive into some rather fringe ideas (hopes?) with a scattering of religious belief and philosophy throughout. Reasonable.