Google is working to increase our lifespan. The company that we mostly think of as a search engine and online advertising business is now in the life-extending business. But we can’t be too surprised—Google, after all, is also involved in the “driverless-car business, the wearable-computing business and the business of providing Internet access to remote areas via high-altitude balloons, among countless others,” according to Harry McCracken and Lev Grossman of Time magazine.
To pursue this ambitious endeavor, Google is launching a company called Calico. Arthur Levinson, chairman and ex-CEO of the biotech company Genentech, will run the company.
Google CEO and co-founder Larry Page has not released any details as to how he and Levinson will tackle death, and said on his Google+ account that there’s “not much more to share yet.”
In a recent issue of Time magazine, McCracken and Grossman asked, can Google solve death? This assumed that death is a problem that needs solving. But is it?
I remember learning in middle school about how much the life expectancy of humans had increased and thinking, “Thank goodness we can live to be 80 years old—40 years isn’t enough!” But now my more highly educated self can’t help but think of the negative impacts that might result from a 164-year lifespan that continues to work toward immortality.
With a greater life expectancy, people will have to work for a much longer period of time, meaning people of future generations better love their jobs. They will not be able to retire in their mid-60s as most people do now because there will not be enough workers to pay the social security checks of the older generations.
Additionally, the planet will not be able to hold millions or billions more people and maintain the current standard of living that we enjoy in the United States. The population will skyrocket. This might result in the government setting a limit as to how many children couples can have. More extremely, some governments might limit who is allowed to have children—probably granting this right to only the wealthiest and smartest people.
In no way am I saying I want to die or that death is good, but rather that death is essential. The earth will be unable to support the strains that a rapidly increasing population would place on it. And because we might be able to live for a century and a half, our lives will become less valuable, which may result in a sloth-like existence.
McCracken and Grossman claimed on the cover of Time magazine that the effort to increase our lifespan “would be crazy—if it weren’t Google.” I say it’s crazy no matter who’s behind it.
