In a throw-away society is longevity of little value?

[coberst]

In a throw-away society is longevity of little value?

For a period of some two hundred years America had an every moving new frontier. One of the appeals of this ever-present frontier was the sense that there was always a place for the rugged individualist. A place existed for the individual who was enthused about the prospect of uninhibited growth where each individual could test his or her capacity to be all they could be. No one had an edge over the other person beyond character and motivation.

Darwin’s theory teaches us that mating and reproduction is the means whereby the species adapted to a changing environment and thereby created the possibility for survival of the species. Generally speaking the human species stops this procreation process before the age of fifty. Biological evolution generally provides no means for adaptation in our species beyond fifty years of age.

Human instrumental rationality has created a technology that continually increases the longevity of individuals of our species. Instrumental rationality is the ability to determine and execute the best means for reaching an established goal. We have determined the goal of ever extending life to be a valuable goal and are constantly extending human longevity.

Simultaneously with an extended life span we are continually shortening the social value of longevity. Like the rest of our commodities we have a throwaway culture for long-lived persons. Our society seems to mimic biological evolution in placing fifty years as the end of adaptability concern. Biological evolution terminates concern for those beyond the age of reproduction and our culture terminates concern for those beyond the age of commodity production.

Biological adaptation has abandoned us after fifty, our instrumental rationality is responding to our unexamined desire to prolong life; how do we manage to survive as a species if we do not find a rational means to engage this challenge? The challenge is to improve the societal value of human life after fifty.

Where is the ever-moving frontier of expectations for the man or woman beyond the age of fifty? Is age beyond fifty to remain a throw-away social value?

I claim that longevity can provide a greatly needed value for our culture, provided that each of us begin developing an intellectual life after our school daze are over. That is to say, if by mid-life we have prepared our self to provide to society an intellectual sophistication that this society badly needs we can then donate a great deal of sophisticated intellectual energy to our culture in those long years that are presently devoted to little constructive activity. This intellectually sophisticated energy can prove to be very beneficial to a culture that is badly lacking in this very important ingredient.

Our society badly needs a cadre of men and women who have grown in intellectual sophistication while growing old in years. Such individuals can provide the Dutch uncles and Dutch aunts to serve the function that village shamans provided to more primitive societies.

 

[antireconciler]

By all means, instead of rotting away or indulging yourself in the lazy luxuries of retirement, become a community leader. Help troubled kids and be like a grandfather. Be active and engaged. Wtf is a community without elders? You cannot have one.

 

[Athenian200]

I don't think it's as big a problem as you're imagining...

First of all, not everyone over 50 automatically retires or stops doing the things they did before. There are some people over 50 who still manage to perform adequately at the same job they had at age 40 or possibly even 30.

I think the incidence of this will increase once our technology gets better at extending vitality and appearance as well as life. Ideally, it would be possible to avoid extending the life span further, but to allow people to die at age 80 or 100, just as fit and youthful looking as they were at age 30 or 40.

I've always thought that one of the more disturbing aspects of human nature isn't that we die, but that we seemed destined to slowly wither to an ugly, feeble state with most of our faculties decaying and malfunctioning before it happens. By the time most of us die, we've already lost too much of who and what we were in better times to even care anymore. Our bodies often outlive our minds and personalities, in other words.

 

[antireconciler]

I've always thought that one of the more disturbing aspects of human nature isn't that we die, but that we seemed destined to slowly wither to an ugly, feeble state with most of our faculties decaying and malfunctioning before it happens. By the time most of us die, we've already lost too much of who and what we were in better times to even care anymore. Our bodies often outlive our minds and personalities, in other words.

I often think that if it were not for the gradual enfeeblement of progressing age, there would be much less pressure on individuals to open their hearts in time. Your elders would not come into the wisdom we associate with age as well. Mortality is that for which the pride of youth dulls itself and the individual comes progressively into the spirit of giving, of gentleness and kindness. And so they come into knowledge. Death is one of the most beautiful agents in our culture, and allows for consciousness to subsist. Without death, there is no consciousness.

Of course, Alzheimer's does little for the individual it affects, yet it still allows for a different kind of lesson to the rest of us, so it is not entirely a waste.

Everything, even our progress against the problems of old age is beautiful. Nothing goes to waste.

 

[Bushranger]

I often think that if it were not for the gradual enfeeblement of progressing age, there would be much less pressure on individuals to open their hearts in time. Your elders would not come into the wisdom we associate with age as well. Mortality is that for which the pride of youth dulls itself and the individual comes progressively into the spirit of giving, of gentleness and kindness. And so they come into knowledge. Death is one of the most beautiful agents in our culture, and allows for consciousness to subsist. Without death, there is no consciousness.

Of course, Alzheimer's does little for the individual it affects, yet it still allows for a different kind of lesson to the rest of us, so it is not entirely a waste.

Everything, even our progress against the problems of old age is beautiful. Nothing goes to waste.

I explicitly reject this notion, the enfeeblement of old age is merely a side effect of the nature of our mortality. Wisdom comes with age and experience, but we rarely gain anything from weakness.
I've met too many wise souls in their 20s and too many bitter old men and women to mistake age and enfeeblement with wisdom.

The only thing to be gained from observing an affliction like Alzheimer's disease is a deep and abiding hatred for the cruelty of the 'Natural order of things'.

Suffering is never beautiful. Wisdom comes from the exercise of living, not the exercise of dying.

I believe that a lot of the reluctance to open our hearts is due to the insecurity we feel about ageing. We can spend so much time and effort preparing for old age that we forget to get on with the process of living.

 

[coberst]

To gain in intellectual sophstication demands that one become intellectually active. One can not gain wisdom via social osmosis.

 

[antireconciler]

I explicitly reject this notion, the enfeeblement of old age is merely a side effect of the nature of our mortality. Wisdom comes with age and experience, but we rarely gain anything from weakness.
I've met too many wise souls in their 20s and too many bitter old men and women to mistake age and enfeeblement with wisdom.

The only thing to be gained from observing an affliction like Alzheimer's disease is a deep and abiding hatred for the cruelty of the 'Natural order of things'.

Suffering is never beautiful. Wisdom comes from the exercise of living, not the exercise of dying.

I believe that a lot of the reluctance to open our hearts is due to the insecurity we feel about ageing. We can spend so much time and effort preparing for old age that we forget to get on with the process of living.

Well said, and I agree, although I cannot share the hatred you speak of.

To gain in intellectual sophstication demands that one become intellectually active. One can not gain wisdom via social osmosis.

How much can you answer with your mind? How much through love? So there are active and passive elements both at work. It is not so straightforwardly simple.

 

[sLiPpY]

I think we're on the horizon of an interesting global demographics shift. i.e. The 2010 census shows that the "average american" no longer exist.

What that used to be defined as is a married 2 parent family with children, living under
the same roof. The average age of industrialized populations all over the world has
increased exponentially, there are more people over 40 living today than there are of
younger ages.

Further, 33 percent of all Americans under the age of 35 are single and still living with their parents. Caucasians are now a minority in four US states. The world is a changing.

 

[Blank]

Further, 33 percent of all Americans under the age of 35 are single and still living with their parents.

Are you serious? D;

/depressing

 

[sLiPpY]

Are you serious? D;

/depressing

Unfortunately, yes... and agree it's depressing as hell.

 

[Forgetful Functor]

By all means, instead of rotting away or indulging yourself in the lazy luxuries of retirement, become a community leader. Help troubled kids and be like a grandfather. Be active and engaged. Wtf is a community without elders? You cannot have one.

I like this. We need to have real communities to be able to support these people, though.

 

[Haphazard]

Are you saying that people who decided never to take part in this Darwin's cycle, i.e. never reproduce, as always being disposable?

I don't see many people retiring at 50 anymore, anyway. Most people can't, even if they're not healthy. Many people work well into their 60s.

Perhaps this is not the way it's been taught to you, but it's always been taught to me that retirement is the 'reward' for your work. You have enough money saved to live relatively comfortably. You now don't have to worry so much about work, work, work, and instead can dedicate your life to more important things like being the matriarch/patriarch of the family, time with your grandchildren, and activities you enjoy and find rewarding. Therefore the cultural benefit of seniors is very personal to the family and not outwardly expressed in culture. Whether or not a senior wants to extend this benefit outwards into the community is really their choice, and most just choose not to.

 

[Katsuni]

Further, 33 percent of all Americans under the age of 35 are single and still living with their parents. Caucasians are now a minority in four US states. The world is a changing.

Somehow not surprised by this... I only just moved out myself, and honestly, it's startling how difficult it is to do these days.

For all that people claim of it being like ZOMG kids are lazy these days! It's hardly true, or at least no more true than it ever was before, but there's alot of extra complications these days... like around where I was living (not sure about the new place yet), there was about a 30% unemployment rate... there flat out isn't enough jobs there to support the population. 50 years ago yeu could literally walk into a store, with a haircut, and ask for a job, and be given one ON THE SPOT. At the same time, too, people tended to still do the 'family business' where if yeur father was a plumber, yeu tended to be a plumber too if yeu were a guy. Of course, if yeu were a woman, yeu either worked in A: a factory, B: a restaurant, or C: had no job. Things like secretaries and most other "traditional female jobs" didn't even exist at the time, or hadn't been broken into yet by such. A female CHEF wasn't even considered remotely viable until the last 20 years or so.

Anyways I got a bit off topic there XD

Soooo I digress!

Back on topic, the point was that 50 years ago, or even 20 years ago, it was much easier to get out into the world in yeur 20's. These days, yeu pretty much *MUST* have post-secondary education... and the costs of such have been inflating insanely... even last year the average university cost increased by over 20% for most universities across canada compared to the year before... but yeu can't get anything but minimum wage with high school anymore. Yeu used to be able to get like $20-30/hour just by going with some trade like plumbing, if yeu knew someone who was a plumber, yeu were pretty much in. Doesn't work that way now... now yeu have to have a degree and training to even be allowed to start apprenticeship, and that means tens of thousands of dollars, at a time when yeu only have minimum wage.

When yeu finally finish yeur study period, and go out into the world... yeu have that immense debt to pay off, and can't afford to both pay that off AND live on yeur own... so most 'kids' are stuck until 30-40 staying at home, because it's literally almost impossible to do otherwise in many cases.

That's more to do with the way that society and education expectations have grown, rather than the children themselves.

So yeah... after going through hell to get my own apartment out here, I think I see exactly why so many are still living with their parents until they're 35; it's highly impractical NOT to, and the only reason one would really want to do so, most of the time, is a silly sense of 'freedom' (read: free and dumb), or really, because the whole stigma attached to the "living in yeur parent's basement until yeu're 40 >=O " that's attached to things... despite that that's based off far older values, which no longer apply to today's situations.

With the housing market crash and such, it's even harder for people to move out right now than it normally was before. There's been some headway there, but it definitely makes sense that alot of people haven't moved out by 35. They just can't afford to.