Sergey Roganov, a writer, candidate of philosophical sciences, the author of the concept of “mortal man”, numerous works on philosophy and psychology of death, answered the questions of AIF. RU readers.
Immortality is good. But, people are afraid of the aging process. Why live forever, if after 60-70 years you are an old ruin, and beyond them, then eternity …
- First of all, you need to figure out what kind of immortality you are talking about. What religion, including Christianity, offers us does not mean at all that you, like an old ruin, will exist forever after death. The soul is immortal, and aging refers to the flesh. In addition, immortality presupposes the transformation of souls that occurs in the posthumous world.
But, if we talk about modern ideas about "immortality", then these are, first of all, various technologies and standards of living, which will allow to start living as long as possible. Therefore, your remark - it completely hits the spot! After all, consumer societies (modern developed countries) prefer to fight not for the purity of religious pictures of immortal existence, but with aging. Anti-aging programs in the USA, Europe are a serious business, and it keeps growing and unfolding … At 60-70 years, turning into a wreck is no longer fashionable, at this age life begins to be quite interesting, and wisdom, the phenomenon of which psychologists began to study, this is a special state of consciousness and psyche, which begins precisely after 60.
But, an attempt to prolong the existence of something, it seems as if the Creator has run out of ideas for creating new forms, and duplicating the old is a problem, in case it suddenly dawns
- You are right in the sense that supporters of a radical change in human nature through new technologies are now called "human gods." We know very well in history who the "man-god" is. This is what Fyodor Dostoevsky called the future socialists and communists. Now, reshaping history, the planet is not as interesting as trying to re-create man himself, as if there was neither God nor seven days of creation. In your remark, you just point out where the supporters of earthly immortality are striving - to take the place of God. As to whether the Creator still has ideas for new forms, it is better to ask him himself.
- Is death part of the logic of a person's stay in this world?
- Yes, the phenomenon of death is part of logic. Hegel's dialectic is the philosophy of death, because negation (negation) is death. For existentialism (M. Heidegger, A. Camus, J. Sartre), for psychoanalysis (Z. Freud) and many others in the 20th century, the idea of death is a fundamental dimension of human existence and the process of self-reflection …
But there is also another context. Your question hides another question - what is the logic of death? Why does death exist, and what is the use of death for a person. The simplest answer is that this is how the world works, but I would like to clarify that the death of living organisms in the sense in which we understand it, appeared as a result of aging processes, at a certain stage in the development of evolution.
- What exactly is the expediency of the existing (short) periods of human life, what positive role does his death play - in terms of evolution, civilization or something?
“Both aging and death are the result of the ability for organisms to reproduce sexually. Sexual reproduction is the most promising in the development of species of living beings, since it allows obtaining a very wide variety of genetic material, in contrast to other forms of reproduction - division, budding. You can even say so - death is the progress of evolution towards the appearance of thinking beings, i.e. you and me.
What is the view of the creators of the artificial life extension project regarding the nature of thinking? It is clear that the work rests on the creation of artificial intelligence?
- Yes, scientists from many countries are working intensively on this now. Centers and institutes of artificial intelligence are also emerging in Russia, but so far, alas, these are the first steps. In my opinion, the main mistake of many researchers is that consciousness is reduced to intelligence, and the latter to a computer. An illusion arises that it is enough to create powerful programs and the machine will start thinking like a person. Human consciousness is not in the head, although it is certainly impossible without the brain. But the brain is nothing more than a tool. Consciousness, thinking is a form of generic social relations and is realized by the actions of the actions of people in society. The difference between a human and a computer is obvious - the latter is impossible without the work of the whole society.
- You were not mistaken by the industry, delegating the problem of radical life extension to biotechnologies? Why do you think that it is necessary to dance from matter?
- I am not delegating this, but modern science, science fiction writers, various scientists and researchers. This often happens in culture, when some scientific and technical movement is immediately identified with a person and society. It is believed that technology is a tool for creating a new person. It has always been that way. There was the dominance of mechanics, and the whole world and man was represented as a machine, for example, a clock. And remember the first half of the last century, when the achievements of the industrial world gave science fiction writers a reason to paint gigantic pictures of a new man and the future of the planet.
In fact, modern biotechnology is the simplest and most effective way to get rid of aging, from the need to reproduce sexually (by the way, there is even a service - voluntary castration, as a means of radical rejuvenation.
Immortality has already become available in narrow circles? Do you want to preserve the current status quo in the interests of narrow circles? Turn things so that the people themselves do not want immortality?
- Why "narrow circles"? Remember - not so long ago a mobile phone and a computer (laptop) were part of a "cool" business. And now? What do you mean by immortality and narrow circles? Fighting for life extension is modern immortality. The anti-aging industry is a very powerful segment of the modern market for services, ranging from medicines to training, fitness, plastic and many others. When people begin to fight aging, they begin to fight FOR biotechnology …, For earthly longevity. And then - why not immortality, what is bad?
Pay attention - when people begin to shift their retirement age to 70, at 60 they see a midlife crisis, at 70 they require retraining and the opportunity to work - these are no longer narrow circles, but mass consumption …
- The topic is, of course, interesting. But, it seems to me, the question "Why do we die?" - if you put your hand on your heart, it is secondary. It follows from the question that a person is afraid to ask himself: "Why do I live?" I think if you transfer the question to the entire civilization, it will be more interesting for you to answer it: "Why does humanity exist on Earth?"
- Why should we die? - this is a question for a person - Why do we need to be people? A person grows old and dies as a generic being, as a result of aging and sexual reproduction … This is a separate and very large topic …
Why does humanity exist on Earth - I think that this is a quite pertinent question and not from the section of science fiction. Perhaps it is difficult for us to answer it, since we have just begun to study the Galaxy, space, the Universe as a whole. But I am sure that the answer to this question will be given, and very soon - by virtue of what laws of the development of the universe inevitably arise and develop mankind?
And, as, I hope, a Russian and an Orthodox person does not seem to you that there is no death as such, there is only eternal and endless life. That is, in other words, you do not need to be afraid of death, you just need to do so in order to deserve and ensure your continued existence
- I'm Russian, but an atheist. I believe that aging and death are a necessary stage in a person's development, an opportunity for him to walk his path as a person. Didn't God punish the first people by aging, multiplication and death? Good. Let's live like people.
- So far, all the achievements of mankind in this area are very theoretical. A person who has lived to be 100 years old is still very rare. The human mind has its limitations, and above the head (above the creator's intention), you cannot jump. As before, the reproductive age of women is limited to 40, and retirement in the healthiest countries does not exceed 70 years. The paradox is that with the emergence of immortality, life on earth will end. As a result of overpopulation, a birth rate will be introduced, children will become a rarity. A pitiful handful of able-bodied citizens will not be able to support the progressively growing inoperable population of retirement age, which will lead to crises, revolutions, wars, sabotage, artificial destruction of immortality technologies.
- So it is, but the retirement age has not so long ago approached 70 years. In addition, now 70 years is the very age when you can get a new profession and start working in a new field … Reading the report of the special commission under the President of the United States, I myself was surprised at how now the 70th anniversary is not considered as the limit when it is possible resting peacefully on the rubble.
And what about a midlife crisis, which now, according to Europeans' estimates, may well happen at 60? And, remember, Porfiry Petrovich says to Raskolnikov - I'm 40, I'm a done man, and you have your whole life ahead of you … Funny? Is it to say now to a 40-year-old that he is a finished man ?!
Is reproductive age limited to 40 years? And artificial insemination, the institute of surrogate mothers, an artificial uterus, artificial bearing of a fetus, how is it? Overpopulation, yes, an argument. But when was this argument missing? In Rome? In Europe in the 19th century? in 20? Tourists in space already easily fly, and in my memory the planet went crazy when the first man appeared in space …
The point, in my opinion, is different - a person is not aiming at reorganizing the planet, not at rebuilding the biosphere, but at his own nature, and radically, in a way that never in all history has swung …
Will this pursuit of earthly immortality end the rebirth of man and his extinction just at the moment when he approaches the desired earthly immortality?
Aren't you afraid to talk about immortality?
“In my opinion, it’s not scary to talk about immortality, but death and lethality are scary …
A person is saved from his fears by dreams of immortality. And here's what's interesting. In the second half of the 20th century, the attitude of man to death became inverted, in the words of the French historian and culturologist F. Aries. Man displaces all visible signs, symbols of death, dying out of sight. Bezenchuk in "12 chairs" sold coffins at the station. And there were enough "funeral" advertising. Have you seen an open trade in coffins or an advertisement for funeral services anywhere?
And the cemeteries now, where they are - outside the cities, further away … Once upon a time the graves of their ancestors were in the center of settlements, among the Slavs too. And the headstones were tables. And the whole community gathered in the center, and at these tables all holidays were celebrated, both young and old …
And where are the hospices now? - on the sidelines, away …
And about suicide, which in Russia is 60,000 a year, is twice as much as people say from an accident somewhere? Not. Is there any psychological help available on the air? No …
Is there a TV program somewhere about death, dying, funeral? Not. It was launched in Germany - CNN said it in a separate line …
Fear of death is a separate phenomenon, and a separate story …
As for me, I am not at all scared to talk about death or immortality … I just never thought about it in relation to myself. Purely research interest, nothing personal …
Well, well! Why would such a question be raised so widely, eh? We are preparing a landing site for ourselves, right? Mr. Chubais wants to make immortality for himself, which means, as you campaign in Soviet times, there will not be enough sausage for everyone, since it is harmful? Trying in vain, dear. They will not appreciate it. They won't take it with them
- Am I suggesting in the topic of the conference to agitate for immortality in an embrace with Chubais? God help him, Chubais … We'll sort it out somehow on earth, humanly …
From this conference I learned for the first time that people who believe in eternal life have a brain as a vital organ. The idea of being able to change even the brain itself impressed. Apparently, this is long overdue for a modern person. Moreover, you first need to change your brain, and only then do you need to rejuvenate and prolong life. Otherwise, why a new life with old brains or none at all? I was also interested in the fact that dying with new brains is not as scary as with old ones. And to die without wrinkles in general awakens enthusiasm! Well, well, to the afterlife - with a new brain and face! I am glad
- The question of brain replacement is approaching reality, although all this is, of course, experiments and theories. But in the West, the problems of brain transplant have been discussed for a long time. Those. this is the usual model for various disputes. The most important problem is whether a person, whose brain is transplanted into a new body, will be able to "recognize" himself, perceive himself as a whole person in a new body, or will all the past information be erased and a completely new person will appear?
Judging by the pace of development of information technology, biotechnology, this will happen in our century … After all, not so long ago they doubted the possibility of transplanting vital organs … Remember - the head of Professor Dowell is a beautiful fantasy Belyaev. But in the 50s, a photograph of a large dog flew around the world, with a live head of a small dog on its neck. Our surgeon, - the famous Demikhov operated in this way … In the West, even such new trends as transhumanism appeared, - the emergence of a fundamentally new person, based on scientific and technological progress … So it turns out that death can be safely put out of brackets …
Or maybe it's “deadly immortality, dangerous "for humanity, is needed not by itself, but just like the idea of death that" saves ", that is, makes you live, move somewhere, strive?
- Actually, the idea of death is a good thing, although anyone like me, for example, is neither cold nor hot, I think so myself and live. And without the idea of death, a person has enough worries. Only now, you are right, the idea of immortality completely supplants the idea of death: people are going to live long. To give birth to many children is already "old-fashioned", so even without philosophies, this death is pushed into a corner from all over …
This question has always tormented me, how much I do not remember myself I was afraid of death like any other person, but with age I realized one thing, that the so-called "immortality" about which scientists are close to getting close to the vaccine against old age is not a gift, but damn it. I came to this conclusion, because nature is not given to a person to live forever, such is human nature - having received an object of desire (immortality), a person will lose love for life, for what makes us live brightly
- Immortality as a curse - this idea appears constantly in culture … Basically - among atheists, natural scientists, scientists, revolutionaries. The main thing is what is meant by immortality - is it just the impossibility to die, or a transition to another dimension? For communist regimes, the memory of the leaders is immortal. And it is worth dying only in the name of the great values of humanity. "Both his name and his work will survive for centuries!" - remember this slogan?
Once on New Year's in New York, I interviewed people on the street - do they need immortality? No, they say it is not necessary. The Ultrafuturo group has a cryonics project, but they believe that no one needs to invest in such a topic
- It is possible that cryonics for the entire human body or just the brain is not yet invested, and in total in the United States, about 400 people have agreed to such immortality. But, after all, societies are fighting aging and increasing the average life expectancy, and this is a gigantic investment, a gigantic sector of the market and services … If cryonics still smells fantastic, then trainings, fitness, plastic, nutrition, perfumery, hygiene are all very profitable, because that people need EVERYTHING now …
- I don't need immortality. I feel quite normal with the awareness of the finiteness of my existence. And I don't feel any moral voluntarism. You have to live with dignity, just because you have to, and no chimeras of rationalism can lead me astray. "Virtue is itself a reward."
- Also the position, no one argues … Everyone has their own immortality. I think that it is everyone's right to choose what is convenient and comfortable for him, whether on earth or in heaven …