Would I be happier if I lived forever? (From a Heideggerian ontology perspective)

In this blog post, we’ll discuss why we wouldn’t be happier if we didn’t die.

 

The German philosopher Schopenhauer said that all living beings have a “blind will to live”. Indeed, throughout world history, there are many examples of humans demonstrating this will to live. The ancient Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang sought to save himself from the fear of death, and the ancient Egyptian mummy also shows the will to live. Even in modern times, Russian media mogul Dmitry Itskov’s Avatar Project, which seeks to develop a body that can live forever and an artificial brain that never dies, demonstrates that humans still have the desire for eternal life. But if we fulfill this desire, will we be happier than if we don’t? Heidegger’s ontology suggests that this is not the case.
According to Heidegger’s ontology, we can only be happy if we live our natural life. Heidegger says that original life can be reclaimed when we confront death and realize the finitude of time. The original life, or existential life, is the life in which one gives meaning to one’s existence and sets goals for one’s thoughts and actions in accordance with those meanings and values. Your existence is fleeting, and no one can take your place. If we don’t realize the finitude of time, we will think that we can do what we can’t do now later, and if this continues, we will live an empty, aimless, and meaningless life. Such a life cannot be called happy. If we achieve eternal life through science and technology, our time will be infinite, and we will not be happy because we will not realize the true meaning of time.
Imagine a scientist who is immortalized. If a scientist is immortalized by science and technology, he or she can utilize the infinite amount of time to do a tremendous amount of research. However, because the amount of research a scientist can do is limited, they can only do good research by having a strong will and setting meaningful goals. Living forever makes it harder to have determination and goals, so it’s not like the scientist above is happier.
This may be something you can relate to intuitively. However, I doubt many of us strive to live an existential life. Heidegger’s ontology, existentialism, and existentialism are most acutely realized by people who are facing death. In the book “The Top Five Regrets of the Dying,” a collection of blog entries by Bronnie Ware, a nurse who cared for terminally ill patients in Australia, the top two regrets of terminally ill patients were “not living the life I wanted” and “not striving for my own happiness. This shows that there is a correlation between people who are aware of their mortality and striving for an existential life and striving for happiness.
While Heidegger suggests that existence and happiness can be achieved through meaningful actions, others, such as Epicurus, advocate passive hedonism, which seeks a state of tranquility by eliminating pain and anxiety. The argument is that doing nothing brings happiness, rather than giving meaning to life and setting goals. In his book Sapiens, Yuval Harari writes, “When you realize through Buddhist meditation the transience of emotions, which constantly arise and pass away, you can let the waves of emotions come and go as they please, and that is the most peaceful and happiest state.” But can you actually feel happy if you do nothing for the rest of your life? Not really.
Human life can’t be like meditation all day long. The state of doing nothing is only a small part of the day, or maybe it doesn’t exist at all. Let’s revisit Heidegger’s existential philosophy. Kim Kwang-sik, author of Philosophizing with Kim Kwang-seok, a Korean writer, said the following

“If you think of dying in a month, every moment is a time that will never come again, and even if you live a single day, you will live it with all your heart. This is the existence of living properly.”

In the real world, most people find that if they don’t fill their time with behaviors that align with their values, they will eventually feel bored and restless, even if they are initially calm and happy. If you feel bored and restless because you are doing nothing, even if you are not living your life to the fullest, you may be living an existential life in the broadest sense.
Heidegger’s argument explains the impact of eternal life created by science and technology on happiness. Heidegger’s argument is that we are unhappy because we cannot live an existential life in infinite time. This argument suggests that humans shouldn’t get eternal life because it would make them unhappy. While human life isn’t necessarily directed toward the pursuit of happiness, given the choice between unhappiness and happiness, most people would choose happiness. If eternal life can lead to more unhappiness, we should question why science and technology is leading us to immortality.