In my presentations, I often tell the audience about the very plausible possibility that in the future some of us (or even most of us) will become very much older, maybe even immortal. I tell them, for example, about the escape velocity theory. According to this theory, immortality will come within our reach when biotechnology develops faster than the aging process itself. This means that the people who lived are the first generation who are no longer sure that they will die.
Will we remain human when we gradually start to incorporate implant more and more electronic devices in our bodies? Where is the limit? With a built-in pacemaker we still consider ourselves to be humans. However, there are already people walking around with brain implants that improve hearing, sight and even memory. Moreover, they can walk again or even influence their mood. These so called 'neuroprostheses', or electronics in the brain, are predicted to have a great future.
New developments in medical science can keep us alive longer and longer. However, should we want to live longer? Perhaps it is necessary to draw a line somewhere in the (near?) future. A fixed maximum lifespan. Imagine we, as a society, determined the moment of death for everyone at 250 years old (for example). That could be accomplished, for instance, by a genetic modification of our genes. This may seem like an absurd idea now, but there are several good reasons for thinking this through. Why do we (at least most of us) have to die at a time that we do not know beforehand.
Nearly everyone, over the age of fifty, knows the photo of the Vietnamese girl, Kim Phuc, who, half burnt, is running away after a napalm bombing by the Americans. At the time, this photo was an icon in the protests against the war in Vietnam. What has this image to do with a planetary consciousness?
Op zoek naar een bijzondere en verrassende nieuwjaarsbijeenkomst?
Verder kijken dan uw scherm breed is?
laat u inspireren en boek hier
Peter van der Wel
rechtstreeks