Immortality vs Eternal Life

[Kahenraz]

I would like to stress the fact that immortality and eternal life are two completely different things and are often used interchangeably.

 

This is an idea I had after reading this topic.

 

I think it will be interesting to see what all of you have to say about this. I'll leave my own input after I hear some of your opinions.

 

Of course, if they are different, then they cannot be the same. Correct? Which would you rather have and why?

 

What do you think each means?

 

If you dissagree with my statement you can also expand on that.

[eldowan]

I think that eternal life is just that. Everlasting existance, but as humans live, they age. So, eternal life wouldn't mean eternal youth.

 

By the same token, I think that being immortal would be more akin to having eternal life, but without aging.

 

I would rather not see the years passing by as an old, rotting, decrepid person unable to lift my head in order to observ what is happening.

 

But, I may be wrong, and this is just my thoughts anyway.

 

Enjoy.

[Kahenraz]

I think that eternal life is just that. Everlasting existance, but as humans live, they age. So, eternal life wouldn't mean eternal youth.

 

By the same token, I think that being immortal would be more akin to having eternal life, but without aging.

 

I would rather not see the years passing by as an old, rotting, decrepid person unable to lift my head in order to observ what is happening.

 

But, I may be wrong, and this is just my thoughts anyway.

 

Enjoy.

I think that eternal life is just that. Everlasting existance, but as humans live, they age. So, eternal life wouldn't mean eternal youth.

 

And as we age our body eventually breaks down and dies. So, if you do have eternal life then you do do still live, correct? But no more within a mortal body. At least, not in the same one.

 

Let me throw a log onto the fire and stir some things up.

 

Lets say that you're either immortal or have eternal life (They both apply). How would you consider mental deterioration? Much of it can be traced back to flaws in your "mortal" state, but what happends when that form is shed?

 

If this is true, then it completely contradicts mental deterioration within an immortal body because this deterioration in itself is flawed. Correct? What about mental states that we consider a "disease", obviously warped?

 

I'll stop here for now.

[thanateros]

If immortality and eternal life are, in fact, two seperate ideas and opperate differently then in what ways would they differ enough to be able to distinguish one from the other?

 

For my own opinion I believe that immortality essentially means that you can not die, by any means (though the collapse of the universe might warrant nonexistence) nor can you succumb to things like diseases, hunger, blindness etc.

 

For eternal life, though, I'll take the Tolkien approach. Simply, you don't die from old age and once you reach a certain point (25 years old let's say) your body stops developing and therefore you are no longer subject to the effects of time. However, where this differs from that of immortality is that you are subject to diseases, hunger and blindness etc.

 

In sum I think eldowan and I agree that immortality is eternal life without aging but we differ in that I believe eternal life has a 'cut-off' point where once our bodies have developed to their peak the effects of time do not cause us to age physiologically (therefore our brains, neurons, muscles and body tissues will not deteriorate).

[Kahenraz]

(therefore our brains, neurons, muscles and body tissues will not deteriorate)

 

Lets say that you mistakenly ate a mushroom with mentally dehabilitating affects, i.e.: memory loss, innability to think, madness, etc. As an immortal these would have no effect on you, correct? Or if they did, you would be instantly healed (if you look at it from that perspective).

 

As one who simply has eternal life in the sense that after ~age 25, as you say, does not physically age but is still succeptable to injury, would this not be a viable and unfortunate perminant injury?

[thanateros]

Ok first the mushroom. You hit it dead on (as far as understanding my point), an immortal would not feel the effects of it, nor experience memory loss since if the being who is immortal is immune to such effect, then their physiological processes and organs would have to be immune as well. For the eternal life scenario, yea it's pretty much suck it up or kill yourself. They would be able to feel the effects of the mushroom.

 

That depends on how you look at it, if at age 25 you stop aging I doubt many people would consider that a viable injury since by its nature, it's not an injury, rather a developmental plateau of human physiology. Injuries are generally thought of as external physical or mental harm, which in this case, eternal life is not.

[Peregrine]

My thoughts on this:

 

Immortality: You don't really live in the sense that us mere mortals know. You exist on a higher level, completely apart from death, injury, need for food, all those kind of things.

 

Eternal Life: You live in the usual sense of the word, except that you won't be killed by time and aging.

 

So if you're immortal, you can't die or be harmed in any way. The mushroom does nothing harmful. Mental deterioration? Nope, you're above minor concerns like that.

 

But if you've just got eternal life, all of these things are very relevant. You're just a human with an expected lifespan of infinite. The mushroom kills your mind, and you can die just fine to things other than age.

 

 

 

Oh, and to answer the initial question... I pick immortality.

[Wookiee]

personaly i was under the impresion that eternal life was the canot be killed one where as imortal was just dont die of natural causes but can be killed :)

 

under this (mis?)conception i would prefer to be imortal becouse i want to experiance death at some point (why should the rest of the world get to and me not?) no im not suicidel or have a morbid fascination... i just feel it is part of life and life wouldent realy be life without death and thus in order to live life to its fullest one needs to eventualy die.

[Kahenraz]

Oh, and to answer the initial question... I pick immortality.

I think all of those Peregrine doomsayers would say otherwise. :)

 

___

 

Alright. So we've made it clear that eternal life is nice, but has some drawbacks. You actually have to be careful as to what you do to a greater extent so you don't end up as a vegetable somewhere in the middle of a forest.

 

It's also clear that if an immortal ate the poisoned mushroom, or shroom (whichever paints a more colorful picture), they would remain untainted. Therefore the correct classification of immortality would undeniable have to be flawless in every form.

 

A mistake is a flaw. A miscalculation is a flaw. Dishonesty is a flaw. Hubris is a flaw. Therefore evil itself is a flaw, or is flawed, but not in the sense that it can ever be unflawed because evil in and of itself is the flaw that separates our comprehension from that of an immortal --or a god.

 

So a god = an immortal being. Correct? In your very own words Peregrine you brought up the flaw of doubt, uncertainty, and the idea of a god, an immortal being characterized as immoral, one of the greatest flaws of Man.

 

If you understand now that one, classified as an immortal, cannot be flawed, then to be immortal is to be as a god is.

 

Therefore to be a god and be evil, or in other words to be as a god is and be flawed, contradicts itself.

 

I would like to expand now that I have enlightened you with a greater understanding of what has been previously stated elsewhere.

[Peregrine]

It's also clear that if an immortal ate the poisoned mushroom, or shroom (whichever paints a more colorful picture), they would remain untainted. Therefore the correct classification of immortality would undeniable have to be flawless in every form.

 

A mistake is a flaw. A miscalculation is a flaw. Dishonesty is a flaw. Hubris is a flaw. Therefore evil itself is a flaw, or is flawed, but not in the sense that it can ever be unflawed because evil in and of itself is the flaw that separates our comprehension from that of an immortal --or a god.

 

Except you miss one key point here. Immortality refers to the physical form, and its immunity to damage or death. Those other things are all mental choices, and only imperfect by our standards. They don't actually damage the physical body that is protected by the immortality, they just produce a being that doesn't fit our society's idea of perfection.

 

Example, lets say I'm immortal, but I make a mistake in a chemistry expiriment, producing a cloud of poisonous gas that fills the room and kills everyone inside. I can still make that mistake just fine. But I am immune to any physical damage produced by my mistakes. The gas can not harm me in any way, but that says nothing about my mind... I can still feel guilt, wish I had been right, etc.

 

Now back to your mushroom example. In that case, the "harm" is (or would be) caused by physical damage to the brain. Perhaps some chemical in the mushroom kills brain cells. The "taint" and loss of perfection is all a direct result of physical damage. Remove the physical damage, and you have none of the other harm.

 

But a character flaw is entirely different. That's caused by personality and choices. You can make bad choices and do evil things without causing or requiring physical damage to your body. Of course immortality would protect you from any physical consequence of your actions, but it would do nothing to stop you from doing them.

 

So God = an immortal being. Correct? In your very own words Peregrine you brought up the flaw of doubt, uncertainty, and the idea of God, an immortal being characterized as immoral, one of the greatest flaws of Man.

 

If you understand now that one, classified as an immortal, cannot be flawed, then to be immortal is to be as God is.

 

As I said, moral "flaws" have nothing to do with immortality. A completely evil god/person/whatever could still be physically immortal and never die or be harmed.

 

Therefore to be as God is and be evil, or in other words to be as God is and be flawed, contradicts itself.

 

There is no contradiction. Good and evil are moral judgements, not some absolute law of the universe.