If humans lived forever and never died, would it solve a lot of the current mental disorders we go through?

If humans lived forever and never died, would it solve a lot of the current mental disorders we go through?

Would it change humanity for the better in the long term, or for the worse if there was no fear of dying?

This is a hilariously broad question with a massive amount of effects to consider. I wouldn't even know where to start with this, so to blatantly stal---er I mean define the limits of the debate, perhaps you should explain what you mean by living forever and never dying? Are you talking about no more aging? No more disease/cancer? No death from injuries or natural disasters? No dying ever for whatever reason? The least disruptive of these would be an end to the aging process. The most disruptive would be nobody dying ever for whatever reason.

How do we age and can we keep memories from our early days?

never being able to die would give me a mental disorder desu

The eldest would be a group of warring bitter manipulators that would try to maintain a "peace" where everyone not as old is under the thumb of a vast information asymmetry.

Old age is the final equalizer of the pride and ambitions of men. The nemesis that waits at the end of all paths, the grinning skull that mocks man's pretensions of knowledge in a universe full of information assymetry. Without that nemesis, men would have no motivation and become a race of pebble counters.

CONT

>but some would use it for wiser purposes

But those wiser men would be torn apart by mobs at the behest of immortal psychopaths and immortal sociopaths. Such men would rather be king of a tree than a servant in wide ranging majesty.

Dude, this whole scheme breaks down once you remember that old age isn't the only way people can die, and also that life isn't a videogame where the longer you play the more experience points you gain. A rulership of ageless psychopaths would fail eventually if for no other reason then you can't be lucky/smart all the time.

>would it solve a lot of the current mental disorders we go through?
No, it would actually create a lot more. People would have to work/have jobs forever.
The human mind can't absorb too much information, everyone over the age of 200 would have dementia.
The economy would be in shambles.

Dementia is caused by aging of the brain. Lack of aging means no aging of the brain which in turn means no dementia.

Your brain can only store a finite amount of information.

Yes and? I don't remember everything that happened to me when I was a child, does that mean I have dementia now? No.

Dementia isn't just old age. Old age isn't a powder you out on things. "Old Age" is the result of the breakdown of various biological systems that maintain the body and brain.

Stopping aging is tantamount to stopping entropy in a localized area (your body). Now if you can engineer a body that can repair entropy, or replace areas degraded by such, that's a different story.

I'm sure a majority of such agents would die. But the few remaining would probably create societies based on fear and blackmail. And what we would have is a never-ending churn until another glacial period freezes the waste fire that human spirit would devolve to.

CONT

Ex: your ability to absorb zinc decreases with age. Without zinc, various repair protocols can't occur including in the brain. Which means proteins stay smash and their bits become prions which wreak havoc in your brain ala alzheimers.

PS:If you're older than 30, you should take a zinc supplement.

>>Dementia isn't just old age. Old age isn't a powder you out on things. "Old Age" is the result of the breakdown of various biological systems that maintain the body and brain.

>>Stopping aging is tantamount to stopping entropy in a localized area (your body). Now if you can engineer a body that can repair entropy, or replace areas degraded by such, that's a different story.
Well, see stopping aging in all it's forms is one of the things this thread is about apparently, as aging is one of the things that leads to unavoidable death for all people presently.

>>I'm sure a majority of such agents would die. But the few remaining would probably create societies based on fear and blackmail
And who says they wouldn't be taken down eventually as well? Who says that few a number of people can rule over the entire planet?

>>And what we would have is a never-ending churn until another glacial period freezes the waste fire that human spirit would devolve to.
This is simply too pessimistic to be supportable.

Eventually you'll won't be storing information or you'll be overwriting old information. That literally describes dementia and many forms of dementia literally are disorders in the storage of memories.
Also, speaking of normal dementia, it often has to do with the deterioration of the end of DNA strands and genes. Whether or not you "age" DNA will be damaged over time and once its damaged it can't really be replaced (unless that damage causes cell death).

>>once its damaged it can't really be replaced
huh? I thought the body repaired damaged DNA all the time?

>This is simply too pessimistic to be supportable

You're too optimistic about human nature to be supportable. Most of them are cocksuckers who run social ranking algorithms for the zero-sum games of societal hierarchies. You can ignore that at your own peril.

It should but bad sleep and melatonin dysregulation (via the pervasive use of blue lights) means that most of society is running on damaged and ever-weakening self-repair systems. They even scorn fasting, whereupon your body starts running the majority of self-repair.

Yeah okay this sounds like bullshit now. Especially the bit about pervasive use of blue lights.

Your monitor, and your phone, emits blue light. That's why f.lux actually works to let you get tired. Blue light on your skin inhibits melatonin release.

On the otherside of things, working in "Office Space" offices suck because you're getting a melatonin release uninhibited by blue light. Which is changing as technology spreads more blue light in the office space.

CONT

Not to mention the bad sleep issue. Meth addicts get bad teeth from inhaling the smoke. They get bad skin from not sleeping and letting the body activate skin repair.

>f.lux

My nigga

CONT

I mean think about this. Would it be more prudent to let skin cells expose their DNA in a field of strong UV radiation or in a field where much less radiation is around to fuck DNA up?

It's also why you shouldn't use weed during the day (release of melatonin which activates skin repair which exposes nucleus to high radiation field)

Wait a minute

>>fasting, whereupon your body starts running the majority of self-repair
Now I know this is bullshit. Lack of nutrition makes the body weaker, not stronger.

>>Blah blah more shit about blue lights.
Assuming for a moment that this is true, turn your monitor off when you go to sleep and don't sleep with your phone next to your face. Problem solved.

This is even easier to solve, don't smoke meth and try to get enough sleep.

The body is used to dealing with uncertainty, not luxury. Fasting enables cleanup of a large variety of cellular junk and lowers insulin resistance. Our food system of the past hundred years is not the system most life has evolved in.

For the love of fucking God, just read up on intermittent fasting. You're comment about nutrition makes no fucking sense because we evolved in uncertain food conditions, not Safeway.

And the meth comment was about the importance of sleep combined with melatonin release. And blue light is pervasive. Your room has to be pitch dark if you want to abolish that effect.

Most of humanity evolved without 24/7 electric lights. That's an aberration of our past century.

Mental Health Nurse here.

Yes it would help a lot with some things. Others not so much. Depends on the disorder.

And one more swipe. You sound like the type of man who values simplistic concepts as opposed to actually examining the fundamentals of how we work and operate.

99% of mass culture is shit dude. Grow up.

CONT

And while we're here, let's pose a thought experiment question.

Who do you think had a better chance of surviving?

A) A beast that has protocols which force the uptake of nutrition at the same time as running various repair protocols

or

B) A beast which maximized processes which maximized uptake of food (always an uncertainty) and then switched to repair as soon as food was gone.

>If humans lived forever and never died, would it solve a lot of the current mental disorders we go through
Literally everything would be different.
I imagine the World would be more fucked environmentally due to there being no deaths.