How do YOU think longevity would affect society?

Tonguez · Mar 19, 2016

Ryujin said:
I don't think that there are any societies, where more than four generations live together. They tend to be tribal. I doubt that it could go much further than that, in practical terms, without creating a small family village of sorts. In that case you still wouldn't really be dealing with many more people, due to stratification and separation within the village.

until quite recently most people didn't survive past four generations (great grand parents) so the point was largely moot, in my culture (which is tribal) great grandparents were recognized ceremonially as the link in extended families but beyond that they weren't present to keep the bond going for further generations. Up to 6 generations is what we would consider a clan/subtribe which occupy a particular locality and share rights but are not considered 'family' and beyond that is the Tribe/Nation.

My grandmother got to 6 generations when she died in 2001 so that was interesting in as much as we still had a common extended family bond. But since she died even that has faded.

Altamont Ravenard · Mar 19, 2016

If I live for 1000 years, would it mean that I have to work about 950 of them?

If so, I'd anticipate there would be a lot of suicides.

Maxperson · Mar 19, 2016

Tonguez said:
you will get an elite group of 'Elders' who hold all the historic wealth of society and don't have to pass it on to heirs. These Elders thus no longer breed and instead employ others to feed them. The elders would become increasingly hedonistic and extreme violent sport increasingly popular as a 'challenge'

I think what would happen is massive inflation. With the wealth not being passed on, and even modest investments turning into huge wealth in 100-200 years, combined with the amount of new money needing to be printed in order to keep things going, inflation would spin out of control. 2 billion dollars for a hamburger!

Maxperson · Mar 19, 2016

I think that two things would happen to a person. People who live super long lives would either cherish them more, or become despondent. Mental outlook and genetics would put people into those two camps. As a result, the laws punishing murder would become harsher. The death penalty would come back globally and people would really be put to death rather than sit on death row forever. Suicides would also skyrocket for those who become increasingly despondent over the boredom of having done everything and nothing being worthwhile any longer.

Hand of Evil · Mar 19, 2016

Work for life - you will be working for life, you would only take vacations. You become responsible for your own wealth, no more distribution of resources at your death.

Population Control - there would have to be something to control population; say an annual selection that will have to die, maybe it is for nations/corps for rights to resources, maybe it is a fake war against AIs but population control would have to be addressed and maintained. You want people to reproduce, if that stops the race could become stagnate and fail on its own.

Extreme activities would be more common as there would be a "lack of risk" knowing parts can be replaced. This would include things like the seeding of other planets, so what if it takes you 500 years to get somewhere.

Growing pains - think the first few years of immortality would be those of chaos, religions would fall and raise, people may do crazy things until they get use to it but this can depend on how immortality is provided. Say it is zombie plague, you are immortal until something happens to your brain, you just have phases; first is the zombie death, you are the walking dead. Then the zombie mutation, where you start to become aware and mostly just an animal. Then the rebirth of yourself as an immortal.

Kaodi · Mar 21, 2016

I am a big believer in a right to offspring. Not a positive right "society must help you procreate" but a negative right "society must not prevent you from procreating". Which is not to say I am not amenable to reasonable limits. With lifespans that long we would probably have a rule related to China's in short order: a two living descendant rule (or even a one descendant rule). If you have two living descendants, you are not permitted to have more. If, for whatever tragic reason, you fall below that threshold, then you could have more again.

tomBitonti · Mar 21, 2016

Morrus said:
OK, I have the other thread asking for fiction recommendations on the subject. Thanks for all the excellent suggestions!

Here's the premise:

It's 2050 or so. People can live a thousand years (barring accidents) and remain looking young and being reasonably healthy for all of that time. It's plastic surgery, and health improvements, and cybernetics, and cloning organs, and stuff like that.

This tech is widely available. For whatever reason, it is not limited to the rich.

Disease has been beaten. Anything which goes wrong can be put right.

There is no tech to upload/download consciousness, however.

Need to ask for more detail on "widely available". There is a huge range of wealth in the world, and "widely available" probably still means there will be a division between folks who can afford the tech and those who cannot.

The availability will have a huge impact. Say:

$100,000 / year (only the top 1% of wealthy countries)
$10,000 / year (?)
$1,000 / year (?)
$100 / year (~80% of everyone)
$10 / year (everyone)

I tried to lookup current income distributions, and since that mixes in with income distribution questions, finding clean results is hard, so I don't have good estimates in the middle for what percentages of folks could afford the technology.

Unless the technology was truly affordable to all (no more than $100/year), I would imagine an amplification of the unrest we see around the world. A lot more terrorism, to a degree to make the current amount seem peaceful.

Thx!
TomB