Sci-Fi Scenario #34678-A

[Ziggamafu]

The year, dear friends, is 2030. Advancements in biomolecular engineering and nanotechnology have made the unthinkable a reality; with a simple, affordable injection, any human is rendered effectively immortal. Although a catastrophic event (say, being blown up or shot full of holes or having a piano fall on your head) could still kill you, old age cannot, and you never contract disease or illness of any sort. Nanobots keep you at optimal muscle and body fat percentages, repair any cellular damages continuously, and maintain a state of youth. There are no adverse reactions; indeed, the injection increases all of your physical and mental powers.

What says the Church?


I think the Church would condemn the injection, because it would amount to a choice of this world over the next, as well as the deliberate choice to refuse the suffering that contributes to the Body of Christ and the glory of the Cross.

[Sternhauser]

I'll worry about this question only after science has been able to first invent a square circle.

~Sternhauser

Edited July 20, 2010 by Sternhauser

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='20 July 2010 - 08:12 AM' timestamp='1279627971' post='2145400']
I'll worry about this question only after science has been able to first invent a square circle.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]


Scientists were recently able to create artificial life - a cell, from the ground up. Awhile back, they were able to move individual atoms to spell, at the atomic level, "IBM". Advances are being made in medicinal nanotechnology and biomolecular engineering every day. And sci-fi (so often prophetic) has increasingly standardized a vision of the future in which humans are rendered immortally youthful by means of new technology.

I do not think it is implausible that something close to what I've suggested in the OP will come to pass in the next 150 years.

At any rate, this is a fun topic or so I thought. Kind of surprised at the underwhelming response.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='20 July 2010 - 03:55 PM' timestamp='1279659319' post='2145622']
Scientists were recently able to create artificial life - a cell, from the ground up. Awhile back, they were able to move individual atoms to spell, at the atomic level, "IBM". Advances are being made in medicinal nanotechnology and biomolecular engineering every day. And sci-fi (so often prophetic) has increasingly standardized a vision of the future in which humans are rendered immortally youthful by means of new technology.

I do not think it is implausible that something close to what I've suggested in the OP will come to pass in the next 150 years.

At any rate, this is a fun topic or so I thought. Kind of surprised at the underwhelming response.
[/quote]

You do not think it is implausible that science overturns death itself?

~Sternhauser

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='20 July 2010 - 06:09 AM' timestamp='1279627790' post='2145398']
The year, dear friends, is 2030. Advancements in biomolecular engineering and nanotechnology have made the unthinkable a reality; with a simple, affordable injection, any human is rendered effectively immortal. Although a catastrophic event (say, being blown up or shot full of holes or having a piano fall on your head) could still kill you, old age cannot, and you never contract disease or illness of any sort. Nanobots keep you at optimal muscle and body fat percentages, repair any cellular damages continuously, and maintain a state of youth. There are no adverse reactions; indeed, the injection increases all of your physical and mental powers.

What says the Church?


I think the Church would condemn the injection, because it would amount to a choice of this world over the next, as well as the deliberate choice to refuse the suffering that contributes to the Body of Christ and the glory of the Cross.
[/quote]
Interesting question.

I don't think that this would constitute a choice of this world over the next, because even in the construct you've set up you allow for death by catastrophic event. That would inevitably occur to every person, given the proper amount of time -- earthquakes, accidents, people engaging in riskier activities because of their "immortality", etc. Most people would still die; it would just take longer.

As far as the Church's response, I don't think it would be a negative. You're essentially talking about retarding cellular degeneration at the same time as providing the perfect antibiotic, antiviral, and anticancer, as well as optimizing the body's metabolism. There are drugs already for all those sorts of things, even though they are not perfect, and the Church has not, to my knowledge, condemned them. What you describe is just something that's better than what we already have.

I don't believe that the Church teaches that we must suffer, but rather teaches that the inevitable suffering that we experience can be salvific. From what you've described, this drug would not eliminate all suffering, but it would eliminate many of the most common causes of suffering. Suffering is not, in itself, a good; rather, it has the potential of producing good in us.

We would still suffer, though, because not all suffering is physical, and even this would not eliminate physical suffering.

It would have a number of interesting societal ramifications. Say it does increase the average life expectancy significantly, and suddenly you have people worrying (again) about overpopulation. What do you do with term limits for public office holders who are young at 80? What would "retirement" mean?

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='20 July 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1279666504' post='2145669']
You do not think it is implausible that science overturns death itself?

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
Not death, just aging.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='20 July 2010 - 07:12 AM' timestamp='1279627971' post='2145400']
I'll worry about this question only after science has been able to first invent a square circle.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

+1 ... if I can find that button. *looks under laptop*

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='20 July 2010 - 06:16 PM' timestamp='1279667780' post='2145678']
Not death, just aging.
[/quote]

OK. So an injection that brings the human body's capabilities back to the time of Noah, but beyond, essentially? A world in which we have to blunder in front of a bus, or slip in the bathtub to die?

~Sternhauser

[SaintOfVirtue]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='20 July 2010 - 01:55 PM' timestamp='1279659319' post='2145622']
Scientists were recently able to create artificial life - a cell, from the ground up.
[/quote]

NOT TRUE!

They created synthetic DNA and injected it into a cell. The cell survived and the synthetic DNA seemed to cause no side effects. But they did not "create life" unless you consider every strand of DNA to be "alive".

[Aloysius]

question: is it reversible? could you get injected, have perpetual youth for a few hundred years, then let yourself age normally?

I don't think it'd be condemned... you'll ultimately make it to the Eschaton and thus is not picking this life over the next. you just get to live until the Second Coming. popular medieval legends claim there were some ppl from Christ's time still alive who would live until then.

anyway, unless advances were made in space travel and planets found that we could colonize, I doubt such a discovery would ever be made available to the general public. in fact, perhaps the Illuminati has already discovered it and is keeping it for themselves

[Aloysius]

"the deliberate choice to refuse the suffering that contributes to the Body of Christ and the glory of the Cross."

this argument could be made against Advil or all modern medicine. the Church (I'll see if I can track down the quote, I think there's a good one from Pius XII in the context of alleviating labor pain) says it's okay to use science to fight against the curse of the fall--ie suffering and such.

[Jesus_lol]

you wouldnt be able to live that long anyways. with incredibly reduced death rate, there would be so many people fighting over so few resources that sooner or later everyone would starve to death or get killed over a sandwich. then things would probably eventually get into equilibrium.

[Aloysius]

[quote]In Genesis (ch. III, 16) we read: "In pain you shall bring forth children" In order to understand these words well, we must consider the malediction of God in its whole context. While inflicting this punishment on the first parents and their descendants, God did not, nor did he wish to, forbid man to search for and use all the richness of creation, to advance culture step by step, to make life in this world more endurable and more beautiful, to lighten work and fatigue, pain, sickness and death and, in short, to be master of the Earth (Genesis I, 28). [/quote]

[quote]The duty of renunciation and of internal purification put on Christians is no obstacle to the use of anesthesia.[/quote]

[quote]The doctor at least attempts to alleviate the illnesses and suffering which afflict Mankind.[/quote]

From various addresses of Pius XII, I think these quotes would apply in a sense.

[Ziggamafu]

When I envision such a scenario as the one I've described in the OP, I can't help but assume that until other planets are colonized, governments would inevitably resort to China's measures or worse for the sake of population control (another aspect of the issue that might make the Church think twice). I don't think many people would argue with government regulation of childbirth when such is the price for a life free of physical suffering and death. Indeed, such a scenario could act as a precursor to serious persecution against all devout Catholics.

Regarding suffering and my "Ney" vote: the shot would represent the choice to render physical suffering impossible (and hence, likely, a large percentage of mental suffering as well), not merely act as a treatment or temporary alleviation of it.

Regarding the artificial life thing: whatever exaggeration is in the claims is mitigated by the fact that innumerable gains are made in the scientific quest for power over the physical world. In other words, the point is in the accomplishments of things that would have been scoffed at only decades ago. The fact that they were able to rearrange individual atoms into a [i]word [/i]tells me that, given enough time until the Lord's return, anything pertaining to the physical universe that is not a logical contradiction (e.g. "square circle") could ultimately be achieved.

Science could never overturn the Eschaton, but science could, in my hypothetical scenario, ensure that most (if not all) people see it before their bodies die.

[Ziggamafu]

There's a passage in Revelation (9.6) about people seeking death (trying to kill themselves?) but being unable to find it (being unable to do so?).

[Ziggamafu]

My 3 year old daughter managed to doublepost. o_O

Edited July 21, 2010 by Ziggamafu