Just this past week, one of our AP multiple choice practices was on a prose passage that pondered immortality by posing a hypothetical situation. “Suppose that people live forever,” it began, begging the question to the reader: what would you do if you were immortal?
The passage classified the two major types of people that emerged in this hypothetical immortal population into two categories: The Laters and the Nows.
“The Laters reason there is no hurry to begin” anything because they have an infinite time to achieve and accomplish everything they want. The Laters are essentially the ultimate procrastinators and excuses makers. I imagine them being extremely lazy and lacking all ambition. The Laters are like your friend that is staying with you because he is unemployed, yet he sits on the couch all day stuffing his face with cheeseburgers and binge-watching The Office. The Laters still have dreams and goals, but they reason that because they have all of eternity to achieve and accomplish them, they can put them off forever too. However, although the Laters sound lazy and lackadaisical, they also sound like they are happily carefree - something I envy and admire. With their perspective, one can live a life free of the pressure of self-imposed timelines and deadlines.
The Nows on the other hand, are the complete opposite. Their mindset is that with infinite time they can do infinite things - or even certain things an infinite amount of times. The Nows desire to have an infinite number of careers so they can get to experience what it’s like to work in every possible job. The Nows even desire to get married an infinite number of times likely so they can experience being married to every person on the planet they’ve ever felt slight lust for. I imagine civilians left and right would be trying to marry all their favorite celebrities at some point during eternity, and how could the celebrities protest? What is the harm? It’s not like a sham marriage is a waste of time when you have an endless supply of it. If you can’t run out of it, you can’t waste it. Unlike the Laters, who use their immortality as the ultimate excuse not to do anything, the Nows essentially eliminated all valid reasons to say no to or make an excuse for anything! How can you justify saying no to doing something when, even if it doesn’t work out, no harm no foul. It’s not like our reality where you can’t get that time back; you have an infinite amount of it! The Laters live lives that are completely absent of any pressure or obligations while the Nows live lives where there is likely the slightest yet constant pressure to never make an excuse. They think they want to do it all and experience all the world has to offer since they no longer have to prioritize and pick and choose what is most valuable to them, but where is the limit?
You see, the thing is, the passage never specified if the fact that people are immortal now, is the only difference between this hypothetical alternate reality and our reality. Assuming it is, then there is still a lot of bad in the world that I am also assuming the Nows wouldn’t want to endure. Despite that, I guarantee that due to the peer pressure their mindset or perspective of “do it all” creates, they wouldn’t say no if their buddy made the following suggestion: “Let’s lock each other in the basement and deprive each other of food for a week.” On the surface, it sounds like something crazy and exciting (in a twisted sort of way) to try - the daredevil equivalent of a simple crash diet - but in reality it is actually very dangerous. While it likely won’t kill you to go without food for seven days, depriving yourself or someone else of food for that long can drastically and permanently alter and damage yours or someone else’s body. Now you and/or your buddy has to spend the rest of eternity suffering through the acquisition of whatever damage occurred.
The passage also never distinctly or explicitly specified if the natural or accidental occurrences that normally kill humanity can still happen and cause deaths, but assuming they can’t as part of the definition of immortal means that people can do whatever dangerous thing they want without being afraid of dying, however, they can still injure themselves and feel pain. Contrary to our reality, they now have to endure that pain for all of eternity in some capacity. They can still take painkillers, but the fact is, they exist that way forever now; there is no permanent reprieve like death anywhere in sight unless they force themselves to die.
The passage does mention that death by suicide is still allowed and possible in this alternate reality with an immortal population. In fact it describes how “some. . . determined that the only way to live is to die.” That is psychologically fascinating to me. As humans, whether immortal or mortal it seems, we always want what we can’t have. The Laters and Nows can’t have death, so they make it happen for themselves by catalyzing their own deaths. This philosophy makes me wonder, if crime wasn’t against the law, would people even want to do it? If R rated movies weren’t rated R would tweens still sneak behind their parents’ back to watch them? The immortal Laters and Nows couldn’t have death so that’s what they wanted. Society can’t have crime, so is that why criminals want to commit it even though it usually never pays off? I have to believe that for at least some criminals the only motive is simply the adrenaline rush that comes from seeing how much they can get away with. Tweens can’t watch R rated movies so that is what they inevitably desire to watch the most. Let’s dumb this logic down even more to a universally, fundamentally, and undeniably realistic example. It is the early afternoon and after a whole day of him misbehaving, a mother proceeds to inform her three-year-old son of the house rules, one of which, she states, is no cookies before dinner. What can any rational person now not only deduce but guarantee that the toddler is going to throw a fit over come 5:00 dinner - the cookie he wants before he eats his chicken and green beans. He had never mentioned cookies before, but as soon as his mom put the idea in his head that they were forbidden and off limits until after dinner, his one-track mind was determinedly set solely on how to acquire a cookie beforehand. You know I’m right! This philosophy is essentially what the passage about the Laters and Nows boils down to. Its conclusion finally reveals this intended sub-theme. Sure it comments on the passage of time and its main message is how the finite will always conquer the infinite, but reading it through a psychological lens reveals the sub-theme that undoubtedly, humans always want what they can’t have. Human temptation simply cannot resist restrictions nor restrictive labels.
The Amateur Psychologist
Comments
Post a Comment