The best classic game music and more
Well, this thread went in all different directions at once. Gotta love STC. 
To add even more to the confusion and irrelevance, I present this juxtaposition of fascism and gangsta rap (specially dedicated to Brandon): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feLqz1udhtY Whoever made the video has some mad lip sync skillz. 
What, are you seriously bothered or entertained by ideas like this? I used to read a lot about this when I studied philosophy, but that's because I forced myself to read it for the sake of education. I can't ever imagine someone going around thinking about this stuff of their own free will or because its fun or interesting. But "to each his own", I guess. Personally, I find it to be a mountain of triviality with no possible solution, and certainly not something I'd spend an eternity brooding about.
Abstractions are things that I need to understand, for reasons that other people can not readily understand. However, I understand why they do not understand. It's simple. They don't care. You won't see me going to sporting events, political rallies, religious gatherings, or fashion shows. This is because I don't care about those things. Considering that such things draw large crowds, it reasonable to assume that most people do care. And since those people see lots of other people at those events, it reasonable for them to assume that everyone else cares.
When I tell people about myself, I often get laughs or strange looks. And sometimes revulsion. A girl I work with does not understand how I can watch movies by myself. The thought actually makes her cringe, noticeably. I've learned that most people do not have investigative minds.
You seem to overlook the blatantly obvious fact that fiction is not reality. Much fiction has valuable human insights and life-wisdom to offer us, but only when it comes to stuff the authors have actually experienced themselves. No one has experienced immortality yet, thus any fiction dealing with the subject is pure speculation. A war veteran writing a work of fiction dealing with the war he/she was involved in has valuable lessons to teach us because he/she has experienced it. There are no "immortality veterans" as of yet, so any such account is bound to be speculative, and probably also deeply tainted by the author's own wishful thinking and preconceptions. If you eat that stuff up its more because of it's entertainment factor than it's truth factor, it really says nothing about the possibility of immortality.
I don't blame you for avoiding the philosophical works on the subject, however. Most of them are boring as f---.
Ah, telling me what reality is? Since you're an expert, tell me about reality. Tell me what is real.
I've liked Stossel for many years now because of his persuasive, no-BS reporting and mythbusting not to mention his proud libertarian philosophy to which I admire. He tends to make most of his enemies today on the American left because he's a avid, trumpeter of free-market capitalism to which he makes a bold, solid case in his "Give Me a Break" book. Have you read it? I recommend both of his books, they have made more questioning of "conventional wisdom" and less knee-jerk as I try to be independent of partisan nonsense. Have you seen his interview with the aforementioned Michael Moore?
I haven't read any of his books, but if I had free time, I would read his "Myth Lies" book
I should have free time... after this summer, when I'm done with all my graduate courses! That will be SO awesome...
anyway, I haven't seen his interview with Michael Moore either, but I'll check and see if it's on youtube. He's definitely a thinking man, and I feel that there are not enough such journalists out there. In fact, there are not enough thinking people out there period.
cheers,
-avatar!
Abstractions are things that I need to understand, for reasons that other people can not readily understand. However, I understand why they do not understand. It's simple. They don't care. You won't see me going to sporting events, political rallies, religious gatherings, or fashion shows. This is because I don't care about those things. Considering that such things draw large crowds, it reasonable to assume that most people do care. And since those people see lots of other people at those events, it reasonable for them to assume that everyone else cares.
A fully valid point, I agree completely. I wasn't blasting you for being interested in it, I was just saying that I find it not so interesting.
When I tell people about myself, I often get laughs or strange looks. And sometimes revulsion.
I'm sorry to hear that, but what can I say? People are like that, especially with things they don't understand.
Ah, telling me what reality is? Since you're an expert, tell me about reality. Tell me what is real.
Again, I wasn't trying to lecture you, I was expressing my own view. Since you claim to be so logical, you can at least understand the logic underlying my conclusion that science fiction may not be a very accurate description of what immortality would be like since it is after all fiction, even if you don't agree with my point.
In fact, there are not enough thinking people out there period.
You can say that again.
Jodo Kast wrote:Ah, telling me what reality is? Since you're an expert, tell me about reality. Tell me what is real.
Again, I wasn't trying to lecture you, I was expressing my own view. Since you claim to be so logical, you can at least understand the logic underlying my conclusion that science fiction may not be a very accurate description of what immortality would be like since it is after all fiction, even if you don't agree with my point.
I understand your point that science fiction is not real. But again, I have to point out that we don't have a choice. The only way to read about immortal people going about their activities is in science fiction. This brings up another question: If something is not real but can be described, then what is it? Does this mean that immortality is an abstraction? If so, then it is as real as the numbers, or polygons.
If immortality is indeed an abstraction and can never be real (like bacteria), then that means it can still have powerful real world implications. Numbers, for instance, are abstractions, but can be used to construct real objects. Immortality already leaks or decants into the real world. It is used to create jobs and increase income. For example, Wil McCarthy increased his income by writing novels with immortal characters. Drug companies can create jobs by offering research grants for chemists and biologists to figure out what causes aging (this is still being debated); this could be called immortality research.
I should also point out that immortality is not to be confused with invincibility. The characters in McCarthy's novels can still die; they just don't age normally.
If immortality is indeed an abstraction and can never be real
I'm not willing to debate this much further, so I'll keep it short. In my opinion, "abstractions" are real. They are a way by which our brains/consciousnesses order reality to make it understandable and graspable to us. You seem to equate the term "real" with a simplistic physical/very rudimentary materialist definition of the word. Yet, our subjective experiences and the abstract concepts we use to order the world (time, numbers, ideas, etc.) are very real in the aspect of reality that they belong to - the subjective. Just as our subjective mind and our physical brain are two sides of the same coin, so are abstractions like numbers and the idea of immortality (for example) the subjective side of the physical processes that occur in our brains. That we can imagine something like "numbers" or "immortality" doesn't mean that they have a real physical basis "out there" - it rather means that they are the results of wishes, desires, thoughts, etc. going on "in here" (i.e. the brain). The number 5 isn't "out there" somewhere for you to find, it's physical basis is your brain and how that brain copes with and structures the reality it is embodied in. What seems to confuse many people about this is that they stick to a very narrow materialistic interpretation of the world that per definition excludes subjective phenomena, therefore they fool themselves into thinking that "if something can be thought or conceptualized as an idea, it must be out there somewhere to be found". But of course, abstractions are part of our subjective life-world (as this is realized in our physical brains), and these abstractions, ideas, ideals, etc. need not have any basis in the outside world. Or would you argue for the existence of for example God just from the notion that some people have an idea that God exists? Some people throughout history have argued that , but then again, those people were convinced Christians preaching to the choir, that argument doesn't sound very convincing to more secular ears. And likewise, an idea of immortality doesn't necessarily entail that immortality can ever be attained or that it exists "out there somewhere". Its a wish/desire/idea born from our brain processes, realized in our minds.
Sorry, I tried to keep it short. >_< Also, my apologies if it sounds like I'm lecturing, I'm just expressing my opinions/views.
Edit: I also agree with you that it is very possible that immortality might one day become a reality, and that a lot of research is being conducted in that direction. What is "real" about immortality right now is that it exists as a conception in our minds that we can decide to work towards. But calling that abstraction (the idea we have of immortality) "not real"is incorrect - it exists in our minds, and our minds very much exist. What happens if that abstraction is one day realized is that we have brought about a change in another sphere of the physical world than only our brains/minds, we have realized it in "independent" practice by developing the technology. I don't think you can say that the abstraction of immortality "leaks" into the real world, because reality is per definition all that exists, and that includes the abstractions we have only in our minds.