Just as I twisted the thread, James Rogers gave it another twist and wrote:
>In a more general sense, I've never been interested in living any part of
>my life in a third person role ...
>Of course, there are some things for which it is simply not possible for me
>to participate in a first person role, but I find that I have a hard time
>maintaining interest in experiences that (for now) cannot be had within my
>personal realm of experience.
Interesting. I have an opposite viewpoint.
One of my reasons for seeking a vastly increased lifespan is to try all the things I'm currently interested in, that are currently available activities, that I couldn't do without a few more centuries. Like travelling to every country, learning to pick locks, becoming a doctor, or piloting a hot air balloon.
There are other current activities that are not options for me -- going through pregnancy, growing up in Nepal, being a dolphin, becoming Pope.
There are current activities that are possible, but that I'd prefer not to try -- being an inmate on death row, working on a bomb-disposal unit, running for Congress.
There are past activities that are no longer possible -- being a foot soldier in WW I, seeing the court of Henry VIII, or discovering the structure of DNA.
There are countless future activities that are not yet possible.
My life is focussed on those activities that are currently possible and are of highest value to me. But I retain an interest in all those other things, choose to devote some fraction of my time to experiencing them vicariously -- through reading, watching, and listening -- and consider the time well-spent.
firstname.lastname@example.org || Unreasonable Software, Inc. || www.unreasonable.com a trademark of USI:
> > > > > B e u n r e a s o n a b l e .