Immortality

1. It may be a relatively shrt amount of time, but that has no bearing on its importance. According to Albert Einstein, "When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity." Yes, it may be only the equivlent of a few minutes, but depending on the worth of that time to the particular individual, the downsides of immortality may be worth it for those 100+ years.There's no guarantee that the memory loos you mention would hapen anyway. In the definition, you statedthat our immortal person would not be afflicted by major injuries or severe permanent damage. Memory loss in which th most important phase of someone's life (which this would clearly be if someone were to choose to be inevitably buried in lava for it) is both severe and permanent.2. "What about the other eras they'd have to live through?" What about them? If the other years aare so important, then it's worth it to put up with the other trillions of years. Let's use a root canal for an example. No one seems to like them, but people do it anyway - because it's worth it.Infinite Probablility1. The fact that there are no planets could in itself be considered "good". Good and bad are subjective qualities, there is no way to say that there will be no good simply because there are no planets.2. How do they clearly oueighthe good, exactly? If you get life in prison, there is a 100% chance that before too long there will be no one left to keep you in there. If y get stuck in a cave, then the planet will eventually go away. Volcano - Your argument here seems to rely on the volcano causing you to go insanee. Doesn't insanity fit the definition ofa major injury or severe permanent damage? If it does, that won't happen. Eternal BoredomThey do if those 7 billion people can think of things to do without planets. Instead of relying on your own creativity, you ca use that of 7 billion people. If you know there will be a tie when there are no planets, then you can plan for that.Human Extinction1. " It takes hundreds of people to maintain the electrical grid and power supply right now." That's because these people are working part of the day and then going home to do all the other things they have to fit into a day. An immortal person would have all the time in the world (and quite a bit more) in which to do everything they needed to do."She assumes that an immortal would have the motivation to figure out all this stuff. Even if finding a way to maintain an energy source would be possible, the sheer work and time it would take actually accomplish it is far beyond what anyone would be motivated to do. " Again, this all goes back to "is it worth it?". If the immortal person wants to use electricity bad enough, then it will be worth it to operate the power plant. If the individual is not motivated to do it, then I fail to see the problem because the electricity is not worth it to them. If they are not concerned with the lack of elecricity, and there is no one else that needs the electricity, then a lack of it is not an issue.2. You're right, it still is a bad thing. My arguument was that immortality be be worthwhile to someone anyway. No decisionis without its share of downsides.Planetary Destruction"She concedes that Earth will cease to exist at some point. This kicks all her arguments that have anything to do with humans and entertainment sources that exist on Earth. Thats her entire case. "You're missing my point. I never claimed that the Earth would be around forever. I claimed that there may be things to do that don't necessitate the Earth, and that the downsides (such as not having a planet) could be worth not having the Earth.Univesal Timeline"I'm making the drastic claim that a planetless universe would be boring, because there would be no resources left in the universe to sustain any form of entertainment."There's a difference between "no planets" and "no resources". Maybe our hypotheticl person is a fan of science fictin, or is a scientist. In that case, a universe without planets would be farily interesting itself and would not need the additional sources of etertainment."When they've decayed there will literally be nothing in the universe except the immortal and black holes."Which ma be a form of entertainment and fascination in itself. Based on the numerous theories about what exactly happens inside a black hole, we can assume at least some people find them interesting. Mybe even interesting enough that, if in a situation like his, you would enter the even horizon of a black hole gain some firsthand experience.