It’s odd to think that I started seriously promoting indefinite life extension when Zoltan was 1 – October 1974 was when I realised that from a cell’s eye perspective, every cell in existence would consider itself to have been alive since the beginning of life (some 4 billion years). Thus the default mode of cellular life must be immortal, and the age related senescence we experience must be an added layer that we must be able to stop (with sufficient understanding of how it works).
The question then became, what sort of social, political and technical institutions do we need to deliver as much freedom and security as possible to entities that have the potential to live a very long time.
Delving into the depths of both biological and cultural evolution, and into complexity theory, has shown me that all new levels of complexity are characterised by new levels of cooperation, and cooperation requires sets of attendant strategies to be stable.
So in this strategic context, complex systems require boundaries for survival.
Jordan Peterson seems to have a better grasp than most of the many layers of evolved systems that are embodied in us and our cultural contexts, and the necessity of these sets of boundaries for the survival of complexity.
Without boundaries, everything degrades to “grey goo”.
We need boundaries, and we need to acknowledge the minimum set of boundaries that are required for the exceptionally complex set of systems that we are.
Some sort of morality is part of that minimum set, at every level.
Ideas like libertarianism are stable only if they acknowledge all of the many levels of such minimum sets – which is not my experience of the political movement.
Freedom is actually maximised by having the minimum set of boundary conditions necessary, and with those boundaries having flexibility and permeability appropriate to the specific contexts present.
There will always be uncertainty and evolutionary change in the nature of such things.
So I am all in favour of life extension, and of maximising freedom, and that demands new levels of social and ecological responsibility. It cannot in any way be any sort of reversion to any sort of childish notion of freedom to follow whim irrespective of consequence, it demands of us something of a much higher order.