Retirement Age in the Honorverse

The actual term immortality as I considered it, is simply to live for an indefinitely very long time until choosing not to. True immortality would be to still be around to see whether the universe is cyclical or dies from entropy. As Dylan said "Mona Lisa must have had the highway blues, you can see from the way she smiles", boring.
I didn't consider any religious aspects, not being religious or having any trust in the science of nomadic goat herders from millennia ago.
The guarded quote I recall estimated that a few lucky first world children might just keep catching each scientific wave of discovery, to keep going. Obviously females live longer as less die from violence, and less polluted areas of safe developed countries give the greatest chance.
Think it through. Where were we 200 years ago? Pasteur hadn't developed germ theory, electricity and refrigeration were unknown, and there were no antibiotics. What will happen in the next 200 years that we have no inkling of?

cthia wrote:

Daryl wrote:There is an extra dimension to this. If prolong adds an other 200 years what may be developed during that time? Quite possibly it could just keep rolling.
Some gerentologists have speculated that female children born in low pollution areas of a developed country now could potentially be immortal.

Just want to make sure I completely understand your post. Do you perceive that immortality, or even several more centuries of life, is a reason that parents may want to draw the line?

If the Bible is true, man lived for ~ 1000 years. Methuselah died at 969-yrs-old. Perhaps prolong is replacing the longevity that man lost.

cthia wrote:

Daryl wrote:There is an extra dimension to this. If prolong adds an other 200 years what may be developed during that time? Quite possibly it could just keep rolling.
Some gerentologists have speculated that female children born in low pollution areas of a developed country now could potentially be immortal.

Just want to make sure I completely understand your post. Do you perceive that immortality, or even several more centuries of life, is a reason that parents may want to draw the line?

If the Bible is true, man lived for ~ 1000 years. Methuselah died at 969-yrs-old. Perhaps prolong is replacing the longevity that man lost.

ldwechsler wrote:Immortality is still speculative. Those who make the claims do so based on what they expect from scientific research.

As for religion, that tends not to be based as much on rational thought (save for Pascal's gamble) as emotion.

It is nothing short of miraculous that simple goat herders got the nitty and the gritty right in the Bible. They had to be either some genius goat herders or either there is something to their madness if they spout crazy insane phenomena that is supported by the very science that you embrace.

Simple goat herders certainly had no way of knowing the most famous scientific equation man will discover centuries later will support an important aspect of their nonsense. Applying science and mathematics to religion opens eyes that aren't soldered together with blondness err blindness. Faith in a higher being is as rational as humanity can get, especially if he believes in science.

One of the first things a child asks is how can God be everywhere? Quantum mechanics tells us how, the very science that made the basket you put the fate of all of your eggs in. Which is fine if you'd simply realize that inside the eggs is the yoke of faith that'll only hatch if you warm it.

A Christian's joyous emotion is simply icing on the cake.

I'm dumbstruck that man applies his science and mathematics to everything but the possibility of a God. The application of the sciences to religion. To most scientists, Einstein's famous equation is only good for making things go boom. Ok, let's get past the Big Bang. Something scientists still argue over.

Again, only arrogant Solarian two-legs would think that they will one day create life with artificial intelligence, but that an entity long ago couldn't have beat them to it.

And that that said entity is even responsible for their seemingly artificial bug infested intelligence.

If you had raised a bunch of pitiful Youngins like he did, you'd probably want to exit the building too.

On an even lighter note, forced retirement is the only way to get a Cat to abandon the fringe benefits of the job he landed with the local produce company. LOL

Daryl wrote:Young senior refused treatment for his mortal obesity which eventually killed him, so I'd imagine that you can refuse prolong. Why not a form of prolong for treecats anyway? Might include withholding celery?

NortonIDaughter wrote:It'd be interesting to see what happens when a treecat wants to retire-- or doesn't want to retire-- from a line of work when their person does. I suspect they'd work it out between themselves like any other close relationship.

Age-wise, I wonder what we'll be seeing a hundred fifty or so years down the road, when the treecats start dying before their people for the first time. Honor wonders in "Best Laid Plans" if the 'cats are aware of prolong yet, but we haven't seen any follow-up on that point, and Honor actively shies away from thinking about it from her end whenever it gets brought up after her own adoption. Previously, most treecats suicided after the deaths of their humans. We don't have a hint how humans react, except for Fritz Montoya's fibs to Ransom. Even though he was lying to save Honor, I doubt he was exaggerating that wildly-- dying relatively soon after a beloved spouse passes away is not uncommon IRL, let alone after the loss of someone who's as much a part of you as your 'cat. I could see that shortening the lives, or working lives, of adoptees in the future.

Which brings me to another question-- do you have the legal right to refuse prolong? What are the laws on suicide, assisted or otherwise? Is right-to-die a thing?

I suggest that we move this discussion to politics, as I have no idea as to what you mean by

It is nothing short of miraculous that simple goat herders got the nitty and the gritty right in the Bible. They had to be either some genius goat herders or either there is something to their madness if they spout crazy insane phenomena that is supported by the very science that you embrace.

Simple goat herders certainly had no way of knowing the most famous scientific equation man will discover centuries later will support an important aspect of their nonsense.

Nor by how it relates to the Honorverse.

Jonathan_S wrote:The child presumably wouldn't be able to make informed consent about refusing prolong if the parents wanted them to have it - but would various governments allow parents to opt their children out of receiving prolong? (I'd guess probably because there are still versions that the kid can accept after they become a legal adult - but that's a guess)

My apology for missing an important distinction here Jonathan. I failed to consider the possibility that the child may wish to refuse prolong. Children may wish to avoid the awkward stage that prolong causes in growth, like the gawking horse syndrome endured by Honor. Since there is a version of prolong that can be had after becoming an adult, then why not delay until then?

Would a child have been able to refuse prolong if an adult version didn't exist? I wouldn't think so. However, I think a child's rights could have the treatment of prolong delayed until becoming an adult.

It reminds me of the movie My Sister's Keeper where a child sues her parents for medical emancipation because she no longer wanted to be a staging area of spare parts to keep her sister alive. She won.

Daryl wrote:I suggest that we move this discussion to politics, as I have no idea as to what you mean by

It is nothing short of miraculous that simple goat herders got the nitty and the gritty right in the Bible. They had to be either some genius goat herders or either there is something to their madness if they spout crazy insane phenomena that is supported by the very science that you embrace.

Simple goat herders certainly had no way of knowing the most famous scientific equation man will discover centuries later will support an important aspect of their nonsense.

Nor by how it relates to the Honorverse.

Why you suppose religious discussions belong in politics is beyond me.

How does that post relate to the Honorverse??? We are discussing immortality. Are you unaware of the relationship between religion and immortality?

There were two potshots made at religion. I intercepted them for the sake of the truth [of and] full disclosure. It is impossible to discuss certain aspects of the Honorverse without religion. Send complaints to the author who is a Christian and who has chosen to include religion as part of storyline.

As far as Einstein's famous equation's impact on what the Bible says about faith, if that post is too cerebral, I don't know what else to say. It is as clear as water.

Certainly you know how faith slots into the planet of Grayson? And Honor's crew? LOL

The old adage of not discussing sex, religion or politics in public with strangers holds for me. People have strong views on all three topics.
RFC may be a christin, but he freely invents new religions in his various series, and points out fallacies in them.
I admit that I still am unable to make a connection between relativity and your faith, despite reading your overly long posts several times.

Daryl wrote:The old adage of not discussing sex, religion or politics in public with strangers holds for me. People have strong views on all three topics.
RFC may be a christin, but he freely invents new religions in his various series, and points out fallacies in them.
I admit that I still am unable to make a connection between relativity and your faith, despite reading your overly long posts several times.

One of my friends favorite quips is "What is life but sex, drugs and politics, and a little church the following Sunday?" LOL

I wasn't aware that I was trying to cover relativity in that post. Unless you feel that Einstein's famous equation has limited utility.

Christmas vacation starts now for me. See y'all sometimes after I've opened my bottle of UH. As usual, I'll bring the heat to cook the raw meat. BYOB.

Happy Holidays!

Cthia wrote:My apology for missing an important distinction here Jonathan. I failed to consider the possibility that the child may wish to refuse prolong. Children may wish to avoid the awkward stage that prolong causes in growth, like the gawking horse syndrome endured by Honor. Since there is a version of prolong that can be had after becoming an adult, then why not delay until then?

not sure I'm right but I believe that while other treatments are available later, they are the earlier and thus less effective first and second gen products.

i.e because they freeze an older body you don't get as much extra time and their are greater chances of complications as the product is less refined.

though a lot of that is theoretical as most of those who received the early treatments and who didn't die of something other then old age are only just about to enter their 200s.

so while in theory they may live to be 300, due to the early nature of the prolong they received it may be more like 260/270 instead of the 300+ of someone who received the most modern 3rd gen prolong treatments.

that is my understanding anyway, RFC may be able to give us more info if he has the time.