Admit it: you're just jealous

Suppose that sometime in the near future, a medical treatment becomes available that can extend human lifespan to about a thousand years. Suppose also that you can afford the treatment. Would you do it?

I know I would. There are so many things in life I would want to do but know I won't have enough time to do. I once calculated that, assuming a reasonable reading pace, just reading all the books I would want to read would take me about 200 years. And that's just books; there's much more to life than books. Life is tragically short and I would take a chance of extending it in a heartbeat.

I know that there are some people who wouldn't take that chance. I don't understand them, but I know that preferences vary, and that there isn't much point to trying to change someone's mind about their preferences. It's all the more surprising to me that there are ethicists, philosophers, and other sorts of writers out there who are trying to convince people who think life extension is a good idea that in fact it is not. They say that the length of human life as it is now is about optimal and that, were it much longer, people would inevitably get bored with their lives and become utterly miserable.

It seems utterly bizarre to me that anyone thinks this is actually a cause for concern. No one is seriously thinking that, if such hypothetical treatment became available, anyone should be forced to take it against their will. If you think long life would make you miserable, don't take the treatment. But since I don't think long life would make me unhappy, let me take it. And even if you're right and, 500 years after making my choice I come to deeply regret it, then I've ruined my life, no one else's. I've made myself miserable; what's it to you?

Prepare now for some armchair psychologizing. I think that arguments of this sort are, for some people, a defense mechanism against strong feelings of envy. Imagine a recovering alcoholic. He loves drinking. But he can't, because he's discovered that he is completely unable to drink in moderation and that, had he continued drinking at his normal pace, it would completely ruin his life, possibly even kill him. So he stays sober. Every day, though, he sees people who enjoy drinking and drink whenever they want, but are not addicted, and are able to "enjoy drinking responsibly," as booze commercials put it. He envies those people deeply; after all, they have something he wants but knows he can't have. The very fact that he meets those people on a daily basis brings him considerable distress. What can be done about this distress? He can try and convince himself (and possibly others) that moderate drinking isn't really possible. He'll say that alcohol is uniformely bad for everyone, and those who think they can control their drinking are deluding themselves. Or perhaps he'll exaggerate health risks associated with moderate drinking. Or maybe, if prohibition is politically viable, he'll passionately argue for that alternative, as it would remove situations that trigger his envy from his sight once and for all.

Or imagine someone who very strictly adheres to Catholic moral code with respect to sex. No sexual relations outside marriage, no divorce, and no contraception ever, under any circumstances. Let's say that, on some level, he believes that "no strings attached" sex with various partners is actually a lot of fun. Every day he sees people who live his secret dream and who seem to lead happy, accomplished and wholesome lives, and he is jealous of them. What can he do to reduce his distress? He could try to tell himself and others that, while a life of uncommitted sexual encounteres may feel pleasant, it is actually not; there's some kind of a price to be paid for living this lifestyle. (Think about those who argue, contrary to most evidence, that oral contraception is incredibly dangerous to one's health, or those who exaggerate the risks of being infected with an STD.) Or, just like the alcoholic from the previous example, he may argue for a prohibition of sorts. Right after the pill was invented, the political movement aimed at making it illegal was quite strong. Today, this attitude can be seen in some of the people who argue that HPV vaccines should not be available on request.

I think that the same psychological mechanism is at work in at least some people who argue that no one should want life extension because it would be bad for everyone. They are those who are morally opposed to extending human life but who, deep down inside, suspect that living a very long life might actually be fun.