I disagree with the fundamental premise here. I would much rather be immortal and stuck in an akratic loop for a few centuries—because a few centuries is very finite and I’ll still be alive at the end.
Meanwhile, all the immortals with a greater sense of urgency about things have outstripped your ability to ever catch up.
I don’t think a longer life is a good reason for taking things easier.
I think you misread. The choice is between fixing akrasia now, and getting immortality now. If you go for curing akrasia, you’ll probably die before immortality gets done, even if you do get to enjoy the benefits of being insanely effective in the meantime. Whereas if you first make sure to not die, you can fix your akrasia later, and then be insanely effective for the rest of however long your new lifespan is.
I’d certainly take an unlimited lifespan plus akrasia-cure-300-years-later over normal human lifespan + akrasia-cure-now.
The choice is between fixing akrasia now, and getting immortality now.
By the Rule of Comparative Advantage, on a planet of billions of people, both can be worked on at once. Since Eliezer—the person originally addressed—is not a biologist, there’s nothing he’s likely to be able to do about senescence, beyond convincing other people that curing death would be great and hoping they come up with something. Fixing akrasia, though, is something that there is at yet no specialised knowledge about, so he has about as much chance as anyone of similar smarts.
Whereas if you first make sure to not die
Ok, that’s my New Year Resolution: don’t die. Sorted!
I’d certainly take an unlimited lifespan plus akrasia-cure-300-years-later over normal human lifespan + akrasia-cure-now.
I’d take all of it right now. And a pony. (Yes, I’m rejecting the hypothetical. I do that.)
Meanwhile, all the immortals with a greater sense of urgency about things have outstripped your ability to ever catch up.
I don’t think a longer life is a good reason for taking things easier.
I think you misread. The choice is between fixing akrasia now, and getting immortality now. If you go for curing akrasia, you’ll probably die before immortality gets done, even if you do get to enjoy the benefits of being insanely effective in the meantime. Whereas if you first make sure to not die, you can fix your akrasia later, and then be insanely effective for the rest of however long your new lifespan is.
I’d certainly take an unlimited lifespan plus akrasia-cure-300-years-later over normal human lifespan + akrasia-cure-now.
By the Rule of Comparative Advantage, on a planet of billions of people, both can be worked on at once. Since Eliezer—the person originally addressed—is not a biologist, there’s nothing he’s likely to be able to do about senescence, beyond convincing other people that curing death would be great and hoping they come up with something. Fixing akrasia, though, is something that there is at yet no specialised knowledge about, so he has about as much chance as anyone of similar smarts.
Ok, that’s my New Year Resolution: don’t die. Sorted!
I’d take all of it right now. And a pony. (Yes, I’m rejecting the hypothetical. I do that.)
Well done, you missed the point.