This article explores philosophical perspectives on whether humans can find true happiness through eternal life, and addresses the argument that eternal life may actually hinder the meaning and happiness of life.
Eternal life has been one of mankind’s long-standing wishes since time immemorial. When we first encounter the concept of death as children and think about it vaguely, we feel the fear that comes with ignorance because it is something we have never experienced before. This fear stems not only from the fear of death itself, but also from a vague anxiety about the unknown world that comes after death. This naturally leads to people not being willing to accept death and wanting to avoid it as much as possible. Evidence of this can be found in the old saying, “Even if you roll in dog shit, you’re better off in this life,” or in the case of Qin Shi Huang, who was extremely afraid of death. As such, mankind has perceived death as something to be avoided as much as possible, and has pursued eternal life. But would achieving eternal life really make us happy?
The philosopher Heidegger argued that humans can actually be happy through death. Heidegger’s existentialist philosophy does not view death as simply the end of life, but rather as an integral part of the process by which human beings are able to complete the meaning of their own lives. Generally speaking, death is something we all want to avoid. When people around us die, it causes us great sadness. And when we think about death, which we have never experienced, we feel a sense of fear that stems from our ignorance of the unknown. However, Heidegger argues that death is a special entity that distinguishes humans from things. According to existentialist thought, unlike objects, which are passive instruments, humans can only be truly happy if they actively lead a subjective and meaningful life. And since it is death that completes an active and meaningful life, it is through death that humans can become happy.
From this perspective, eternal life is likely to bring unhappiness to humanity. From an existentialist perspective, death makes humans aware of the finite nature of time, which leads them to search for the meaning of life. The anxiety that comes from this finitude actually pushes people to engage in more meaningful activities. However, if humans were to be granted eternal life, this temporal constraint would be removed, and people would be forced into idleness. For example, suppose a boy who is new to the guitar is inspired to become a musician by watching many great guitarists play. If life is finite, this boy will do a lot of self-improvement to fulfill his dream within the time allotted, and in the process, he will find his own sense of fulfillment and happiness. However, the boy who is granted eternal life will not feel the need to work on his dream right away because he has an infinite amount of time to work on it. This would be a far cry from the happiness that existentialists talk about.
However, there are other views of happiness. According to Epicurus, known as a hedonist, happiness can also be found in passive pleasures. This passive pleasure is, simply put, not doing something you don’t like. We often think of pleasure as something you have to actively do to enjoy. For example, hanging out with friends and drinking on the weekend when you don’t have a lecture can bring you momentary pleasure. However, the emptiness or futility that you feel after the fun is over can cause you to suffer the equivalent of momentary pleasure. On the other hand, passive pleasures, as Epicurus emphasized, are subtle, long-lasting pleasures. The idea is that happiness can be achieved by letting go of the compulsion to be what you should be and being content with what you are.
This view is at odds with existentialist philosophy. Heidegger believed that through death, a person can achieve self-realization, and in the process, experience happiness. However, in Epicurus’ view, self-realization can actually hinder happiness. The obsession with “what I should be” can cause stress, and the feeling of emptiness that comes with achieving each goal can actually prevent happiness. Instead, freeing ourselves from this compulsion and enjoying the simple pleasures of everyday life is closer to the true happiness Epicurus advocates.
So, is Heidegger completely wrong that eternal life leads to unhappiness? The answer is that he is partly right and partly wrong. Another way of looking at happiness can be found in Yuval Harari’s book Sapiens. In this book, he divides the factors of happiness into two main categories. Psychological happiness and chemical happiness. Psychological happiness is the happiness that comes from the relationship between objective conditions and subjective expectations. For example, if a person wants a used car and buys a used car at a low price, they are happy because their expectations were met. On the other hand, someone who wanted a luxury sports car would be disappointed if they only got a used car. Psychological well-being is the feeling of happiness when a situation or outcome meets one’s expectations. This explains why, despite the fact that humanity has become materially richer, we can’t say that we are much happier than in the past. As civilization has progressed, objective conditions have improved, but the level of happiness has not changed much because individuals’ subjective expectations have also increased.
Thus, despite human progress, the increase in happiness has not been very noticeable. What about future societies? In the future, advances in science and medicine are likely to greatly increase human lifespans. If, in the distant future, humans will enjoy eternal life, will this provide a better quality of life for humans? Given modern advances in science and medicine, eternal life may not be completely impossible.
Now, let’s consider whether humanity will be truly happy in a future society where eternal life is possible. We need to analyze this question from the perspective of psychological and chemical happiness. From the perspective of psychological happiness, it is hard to imagine that people’s happiness will increase significantly due to scientific and technological advances. Of course, the first generation to experience eternal life may be very happy. But over time, as the concept of eternal life becomes more familiar, or as the next generation takes it for granted, it will not be part of their subjective expectations. Eternal life, as well as the greater amenities we will enjoy in future societies, will not significantly increase psychological well-being. Therefore, not only will eternal life not bring additional happiness to humanity, but it will not bring unhappiness, as Heidegger claimed. This is why Heidegger’s idea is half right and half wrong.
Humanity has gone through numerous scientific and social revolutions since it began as an ancient hunter-gatherer society. However, it is hard to say that each revolution has made humanity noticeably happier. The same will be true for future societies. Even if humans are granted eternal life, the level of happiness will not change much. This doesn’t mean that all of these advances are for naught. Similarly, we can’t say that future societies will necessarily turn into dystopian, depressing societies. Instead, we need to look back at how we’ve defined happiness in the past and think about how we can do better in the future.
