Archonus wrote:Normalcy's generally a bad thing.
That's a little general - be careful with that one. I think it's very good that my blood pressure, for example, is quite normal.
Archonus wrote:I understand it perfectly when you see it in the light of "reckless abandon and without consideration", but I'm thinking in terms of general technological progress. I'm seeing that we're eventually going to get to this point, with reckless abandon or not, if we don't kill ourselves first. But I suppose you're saying the method in which we'd reach such technological achievements is a bad thing and not the achievements themselves? Or should we just never even consider developing our technology to that point?
I think the trouble you're having here that you are missing a far more basic point:
Things require context to have meaning or value.
Eg., pleasure/pain; wealth/poverty; life/death; good/bad; even good/evil, if you like. If you eliminate any one item from any of these these pairs, it's mate would cease to have either value or meaning. So if you personally value and would like to continue to enjoy such things such as fleshy pleasures, power, wealth, or life, eliminating their opposites would be a very bad idea.
This is in addition to the logistical concerns of a world populated with immortal people. If Wikipedia is to be believed, about half as many people die each year as are born. You would double the rate of population growth of the planet if no one ever died.
I, for one, don't really care for crowds.