Advances in science and the aging process

Imagin" rel="nofollow">ine the followin" rel="nofollow">ing scenario: advances in" rel="nofollow">in science have stopped the agin" rel="nofollow">ing process. A simple in" rel="nofollow">injection will permanently arrest the process which has been the natural course of all human existence, enablin" rel="nofollow">ing in" rel="nofollow">individuals to contin" rel="nofollow">inue livin" rel="nofollow">ing in" rel="nofollow">indefin" rel="nofollow">initely. Theoretically, people could live forever. Of course, persons would still be vulnerable to in" rel="nofollow">injury, diseases that have nothin" rel="nofollow">ing to do with agin" rel="nofollow">ing (e.g. in" rel="nofollow">infections), violence, toxicity, etc. Agin" rel="nofollow">ing, not death itself, has been elimin" rel="nofollow">inated. However, not everyone can be a beneficiary of this wonder drug. Choose one of the followin" rel="nofollow">ing situations: 1-You are among the .001% of the human population which cannot be treated, so you will age in" rel="nofollow">in the manner which has been considered 'normal' prior to this new medical advance. In all likelihood, you would be the only person in" rel="nofollow">in your social circle in" rel="nofollow">in this unchanged state. 2-a: You can be treated and so you will never age. However, your only child is among those who is not receptive to the treatment and so will age, and eventually die, naturally. If you prefer, change the child to beloved spouse or a siblin" rel="nofollow">ing. Or, 2-b: Consider that you and your entire family are genetically excluded from the treatment, and that your progeny would also be excluded. 3-You and everyone you know and love is receptive to the treatment, but one person whom you detest, even hate, is not receptive, and so this enemy will age and eventually die naturally. 4-a: The drug stops agin" rel="nofollow">ing from the moment you receive it. You are receptive, but the treatment arrives when you are 80 years old. You would stop agin" rel="nofollow">ing from that moment on, but you'd be 80 for the rest of your extended life. Or, 4-b: regardless of age, although you are receptive, you consider agin" rel="nofollow">ing a natural and desirable process and so declin" rel="nofollow">ine the drug. Why? Consider the emotional, spiritual, and existential impact which this exclusion would have on you. Would this alter your sense of personal worth? If you are a religious in" rel="nofollow">individual, would this affect your faith in" rel="nofollow">in God, Divin" rel="nofollow">ine justice, etc? How would it impact your view of science? How might this exclusion alter your sense of the purpose or meanin" rel="nofollow">ing of existence? Regardless of whether you can be treated or not, would you consider the new treatment a total benefit for mankin" rel="nofollow">ind, a partial one, a total curse, a partial calamity? What impact might it have on activities we consider life- enrichin" rel="nofollow">ing? Would we be less or more likely to engage in" rel="nofollow">in dangerous thrills considerin" rel="nofollow">ing how much more we have to lose—a potentially endless existence as opposed to a limited one? What impact might this development in" rel="nofollow">in medicin" rel="nofollow">ine have on what we consider good or bad in" rel="nofollow">in art and culture, morality, ethics, law (e.g. capital punishment), politics? What impact is it likely to have on birth control, for example, or notions of love, family, friendship, fidelity, marriage, duty to country, among many other concepts that in" rel="nofollow">influence our personal and collective values? Keep in" rel="nofollow">in min" rel="nofollow">ind that this is supposed to be a reflective, analytical essay, not merely the expression of opin" rel="nofollow">inions and feelin" rel="nofollow">ings.