Michael Sparre

Professor Ryan Sloan

Colwrit R4B

25 September 2018

The Land of Immortality: Dispossessed of All Humanity

Death has been an inevitable fact of life since the creation of biological life, yet humans

refuse to accept the fragility of one’s mortality. Whether driven by fear of what comes after

death or by one’s need for power over the unknown, man has been obsessed with the afterlife for

millennia. With the advent of advanced technology, faith in the impossible has boomed

exponentially. Humanity’s desire to evade death has been demonstrated throughout history, yet

with today’s technology, a future where humans transcend the barrier presented by death seems

exceedingly hopeful. However, humanity’s intense thirst for immortality has pushed our race

towards artificiality, raising the question of whether these biological or digital versions will be

authentic renditions of ourselves?

A new era of technology is upon us. An era in which humanity is dependent on the digital

outputs of our mechanical inventions. The technological age that we are currently in has

unlocked many feats believed to be beyond the bounds of possibility. In the article, “Learning to

Love our Robot Co-Workers,” Kim Tingley illustrates how humans can work alongside their

mechanical counterparts to reap the synergistic effects of their symbiotic relationship.

“Collaborative robots” are becoming increasingly integrated into the workforce to increase

efficiency by executing programmable functions while humans perform the more advanced and

intricate tasks (Tingley). Within the last few decades, technology’s growing presence in the

physical world has begun to directly and indirectly influence the lives of billions. While Tingley
explores the direct relationship between robots in the workforce and an increase in overall

productivity and efficiency, technology also has an impact on the perception of reality.

In the video above, Ray Kurzweil, an accomplished computer scientist and optimist of

artificial intelligence, fantasizes about a future capable of combatting age and integrating our

natural self with technology, convinced that one day we will “become entirely artificial

ourselves” (Fry, 00:00 – 02:44). For the entirety of our existence, death has been an inescapable

constraint on life. However, many people have attempted to defeat the challenge of mortality;

Miles Klee discusses the visions of Leonard Jones, Larry Page, Ray Kurzweil, among others in

his article “Ever After: Solving the Problem of Mortality” in which their fantasies of immortality

are overshadowed by the nature of life, death. Though no successful attempts of immortality

have been achieved, the desire for prolonged life is the direct consequence to increasing

developments in technology and AI systems. Technology has inspired a new generation of

humanity to believe that truly anything is possible – even escaping mortality. While the

biological escape of life is still unattainable, people have begun to experiment with the

possibility of digitally reincarnating life. Casey Newton demonstrates the feasibility of

programming a person in his article “Speak, Memory.” Analyzing the story of Eugenia Kuyda

reviving her dead best friend through AI software, it is apparent that artificial intelligence does a

great job in replicating the mannerisms of our speech yet fails to differentiate itself through the

human characteristics determined by our consciousness (Newton). Even though it may be

possible to create a digital version of ourselves that seem like us, it is nothing more than a

sequence of algorithms and programs designed to act like us depending on the inputs given.

From failed immortality to realistic digital bots, technology has inspired humanity’s fascination

with eternal life, encouraging millions that the impossible, one day, may be possible. But how is
this form of ‘eternal life’ so alluring? Humans are willing to give up their biological processes,

the very matter of life, to sustain a form of their consciousness that was never encoded to exist

forever. The interactions, events, and adventures that occur in one’s life is what makes each

person’s existence unique. If we take away this aspect of life by programming ourselves, there

will be no more individuality, no more originality, no more humanity. We will be nothing more

than the amalgamation of computing units programmed with who we once were, with no idea,

nor ability, of knowing who we are yet to become.

Going back in time, a pattern of mortal defiance is conspicuous. For centuries,

individuals have despised their transient bodies, resulting in the inevitable curiosity of how to

avoid one’s own mortality. Dating back to 1800 BC, the Epic of Gilgamesh relays a tale in which

Gilgamesh searches for the secret of immortality following the death of his close friend, Enkidu

(Al-Khatib). Though Gilgamesh was unsuccessful in his quest, his desire would soon become a

common theme as humans sought to transcend our ephemerality. Building from Gilgamesh’s

quest, Chinese emperors began seeking magic elixirs for prolonged life, resulting in the death of

China’s first emperor, Qin Shi Huang, from the consumption of a mercury pill (Al-Khatib). Qin

Shi Huang was one of many who were willing to risk their life for perpetuity, setting a trend for

future generations to come to ponder the certainty of one’s mortality. Millenniums later, a

different perception of how immortality may be accomplished emerged. While individuals

searched for the secret to immortality or a magical elixir, there were those who believed in a

famous site of mythical immortality – the Fountain of Youth. As we continue to learn more

about history, it becomes increasingly clear that “people have sought magical ways to restore

their youth” (Drye). A famous sixteenth century Spanish explorer known as Juan Ponce de Leon

is affiliated with the discovery of the Fountain of Youth for his alleged encounter with the
fountain in Florida (Drye). Though the fountain may not reverse the age of its users, its mere

alleged existence drives humanity’s curiosity and perception of immortality towards that of

fruition and reality. While the technological foundations of how a fountain of youth may reverse

aging are nonexistent, the ideas of today are galvanized by the mystery of our bodies: scientists

and researchers around the world are determined to bridge the gap between our knowledge of

physiology with that of technology, shaping a future where prolonged life is feasible.

In this day and age, technology has enabled society to truly believe that we are on the

verge of living forever. Perceptions of death have changed drastically over the last century; an

increasing number of scientists are convinced that death is merely a “disease that can be treated

or even cured” (Galeon and Houser). Reinforced by Dr. Aubrey de Grey, “the first person to live

to 1,000 years is likely walking the earth right now” (Starr). As our understanding of the body

exponentially increases, so does our aptitude for what to do with that knowledge. Biological

means of extending life have existed for centuries, however, the advent of newer and more

powerful technology continually allows for new innovations in the realm of our physiology.

Committed to perpetuating our existence on this world, many people have dedicated their

lives to the possibility of creating digital versions of ourselves to outlive our temporary, physical

bodies. While coding bots to respond and talk like humans is a feat of the past, an increasing

amount of work has been devoted to mapping cerebral thought in addition to the neural link

between technology and our brains. Swedish scientists are attempting to build robots that serve

as “fully conscious copies” of ourselves (Schulze). In this form, immortality is perceived as

leaving a digital trace of yourself, yet excluding your physical being from the equation. As more

and more advanced technology increases the capability to map and communicate with the brain,

how will we know whether these digital versions reflect the consciousness of our true beings?
Are our thoughts much different than the production of complex algorithms deciding what tasks

and feelings to associate ourselves with as time goes on? The complexity in determining the

essence of life is a complex situation that depends on the concept of consciousness and the

human soul.

The theory behind the human “soul” is something most people understand and believe in,

yet it is quite difficult to explain. The existential circumstances behind our life are unknown,

however, as our technology and artificial intelligence knowledge begins to converge towards a

singularity, we must face the question of whether different forms of life and intelligence can

possess a “soul.” In his article “What Would it Mean for AI to Have a Soul,” Brandon

Ambrosino explores the understanding of the soul in a historical and contemporary context. In

the history of Greek Philosophy, “Socrates argues that the soul is the element that ‘when present

in a body, makes it living’” (Ambrosino). While this definition helps understand the disparities

between AI and humans now, it doesn’t explain how we might be able to install a fabricated soul

into a system. Marvin Minsky, co-founder of the MIT AI Laboratory, believes in the

development of a soul within AI: defining the soul as “‘the word we use for each person’s idea of

what they are and why’” (Ambrosino). Furthermore, Minsky considers that our soul is the

conglomeration of thoughts of nature, implying that computers hold the capability of forming

their own identity through conversations with one another. While the mechanics behind our

thoughts and feelings may not be identical, it is conceivable to think that AI will be able to form

a persona and act as humans in the future.

The certain advancement of technology is bound to shake our perception of reality in

some form. The challenge of immortality may be solved in a few decades or less. Yet, the

certainty of technology still enables millions of uncertainties of how and what will arise with the
advancements of AI. Our inescapable desire for immortality has shaped science and research for

millennia and we are on the verge of reaching a technological singularity. If we are successful in

creating the technology to extend our lives indefinitely, how will that affect the lives of billions.

Will time become an applicable factor in the socioeconomic war between the elite and the poor?

While Kurzweil is a spirited supporter of immortality and optimist of AI, he holds his own

opinions about a future not bound to decay: “Death gives meaning to our lives. It gives

importance and value to time. Time would become meaningless if there were too much of it”

(BrainyQuote). The subjugation of life to time has dominated since the evolution of life itself; a

future not bound to time will create a world never known to man.
 Works Cited

Al-Khatib, Talal. “Seeking Immortality? So Have Others...” Seeker, Seeker, 8 Apr. 2013,

www.seeker.com/seeking-immortality-so-have-others-1767387860.html.

Ambrosino, Brandon. “Future - What Would It Mean for AI to Have a Soul?” BBC News, BBC,

18 June 2018, www.bbc.com/future/story/20180615-can-artificial-intelligence-have-a-

soul-and-religion.

Drye, Willie. “Finding the Mythical Fountain of Youth.” A Guide to Kentucky's Mammoth Cave

National Park, 21 Jan. 2017, www.nationalgeographic.com/archaeology-and-

history/archaeology/fountain-of-youth/.

Fry, Stephen, director. Will AI Make Us Immortal? Or Will It Wipe Us out? Elon Musk, Ray

Kurzweil and Nick Bostrom. YouTube, YouTube, 4 Feb. 2017,

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgVI2vBxQK4.

Galeon, Dom, and Kristin Houser. “Expert: Human Immortality Could Be Acquired Through

AI.” Futurism, 21 Apr. 2017, futurism.com/expert-human-immortality-could-be-

acquired-through-ai/.

Klee, Miles. “Ever After: Solving the Problem of Mortality.” Lapham's Quarterly, 30 Nov. 2013,

www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/ever-after.

Newton, Casey. “Speak, Memory.” The Verge, The Verge, 6 Oct. 2016,

www.theverge.com/a/luka-artificial-intelligence-memorial-roman-mazurenko-bot.
Ray Kurzweil. “Ray Kurzweil Quotes.” BrainyQuote, Xplore,

www.brainyquote.com/authors/ray_kurzweil.

Schulze, Tyler. “Immortality May Be Within Reach, Courtesy of AI Robots.” Veritone, Inc., 13

Mar. 2018, www.veritone.com/insights/immortality-with-ai/.

Starr, Bernard. “On the Verge of Immortality, Or Are We Stuck with Death? A New Direction

For Research Could Provide the Answers--and More.” The Huffington Post,

TheHuffingtonPost.com, 13 Jan. 2018, www.huffingtonpost.com/bernard-starr/on-the-

verge-of-immortali_b_14133856.html.

Tingley, Kim. “Learning to Love Our Robot Co-Workers.” The New York Times, The New York

Times, 23 Feb. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/magazine/learning-to-love-our-robot-

co-workers.html?smid=pl-share.