Defeating Metastatic Cancer, Sadness, and Death Through Reason: My Journey
I Am My Personality
Once diagnosed, radical prostatectomy was performed almost immediately. Long story short, getting rid of the prostate did not get rid of the cancer. It had already metastasized. By early 2024, my PSA level was rising again.
My first attempt to defeat cancer was fasting. I had previously benefitted a lot from fasting for other ailments. For cancer, the reasoning was that cancer cells are unhealthy cells, and during a fast a higher proportion of unhealthy cells should die compared to healthy cells, and healthy cells should recover faster than unhealthy cells after the fast is over. Also, according to naturopaths who I had visited many years ago, fasting "cleans" the body and improves the functioning of the immune system.
After a 4-day water-only fast, my PSA level was down by 10%, which was quite encouraging. Over a few months, I did a 7-day water-only fast and an 8-day fast. This may sound a lot, but Alexander Grothendieck, arguably the greatest mathematician of the 20th-century, is supposed to have done a 44-day fast. To make the long fasts work, I needed to find work to keep me busy. I had a burst of energy the first few days of the fasts, and I broke the fasts when I started feeling weak. I had lost about 5% to 7% of my body weight. Unfortunately, these fasts did not cure the cancer. The PSA level was rising again. Maybe if I had done a 40-day fast it would have crushed the cancer, but I decided not to find out.
It was now clear that, barring some major advancement in medicine, the cancer would not be cured as it had already metastasized. The medical options were hormone therapy and radiation, which would curb the cancer for an uncertain period of time.
I wanted more. I wanted a cure. I wanted to defeat cancer and Death. I went through a short period of being depressed and then came out swinging.
I wanted to defeat Cancer and Death, so I needed to answer the question, "What is my Life?".
My answer is, my Life is my Personality. My Personality resides in my body.
My Life is Sweet, Death is Sad, I Will Defeat Death
My Life is Sweet, Death is Sad, I Will Defeat Death
It is like a driver and a car. When a car breaks down the driver replaces the car rather than giving up. Now thanks to advances in medical science, my Personality can continue in My Next Iteration, that is my biological clone with my abilities, my emotional reactions, my desires, my intellect, my assets, my relationships, and my memories.
1) My intrinsic intellectual and other biological characteristics that are determined by my biological/physical brain and the rest of my body.
2) My other intellectual abilities that are determined by my education and other environmental influences.
3) My memories.
4) My relationships.
5) The goals I have set for myself and the experiences (pleasures, achievements etc.) that I have had and want in the future.
6) My reputational assets such as the education degrees I obtained, the opinion others have due to my actions, etc.
7) My financial and other economic assets that I have obtained due to my actions.
There are only two options for me:
1) Death
2) Living on by accepting that my Life is my Personality.
There is no 3rd option. I choose Life.
Not only is Death the most wretched useless idea, it is also illogical and not the Reality/Truth as I will explain below.
Would continuing my Personality in a new body after the end of my body be a continuation of my Life? Specifically, if I said that my clone with my memories, my reputation, my assets etc. would be a continuation of my Life, would that be the Reality/Truth? I was looking for something that would work for me, so it had to be something I could honestly believe 100%, no wishful thinking.
Over many decades I have given much thought to Reality/Truth, and developed an understanding that is based on Reason. This understanding was critical to answering the above question about the continuation of my Life.
It requires a Human to believe in something for it to be Reality/Truth for that Human. A Human will not believe in something perceived as "illogical", "unreasonable", "fake" etc., but will believe in something that is "logical", "reasonable", "genuine" etc.
As I seek to defeat Death, the question arises: "Is it Reality/Truth that I am my Personality, and that I can defeat Death by continuing my existence by transferring my memories, relationships, abilities, and assets to my clone?"
Is my Personality really me? Is that the Truth/Reality?
This of course first requires the answer to the question: "What is Reality/Truth?" I needed a deeper dive into understanding Reality/Truth.
What is Reality/Truth?
This is the most important question philosophers have sought to answer for millennia, however I found the answers unsatisfactory.
I provide the precise answer in detail in my forthcoming book "The Nature Ternary: The Nature of Humans; The Nature of Groups; and The Nature of Reality".
The precise answer is based on Reason. Here is a concise version. There are 3 Elements:
Element 1:
Anything that we feel, experience, or believe in is a product of our physical thought mechanism (brain). For the physical thought mechanism to believe that something does not owe its existence to itself is a paradoxical attempt to go beyond itself.
Element 2:
The following Elements 2a and 2b are Accuracy Constraints required for Consistency with Other Realities. Other Realities may be divided into the Existing Situation of the Other Realities and the Change/Progression/Evolution/Transformation of the Existing Situation to the Future Situation.
There are two kinds of Other Realities: the realities of other Humans and Sentient Beings, and Physical Reality.
Element 2a:
Our Reality has to be Consistent with the Existing Situation of the realities of other Humans and other Sentient Beings. We should not, for example, believe that another Human is happy when the other Human is actually sad.
Our Reality should also be Consistent with the Existing Situation of Physical Reality. We should not, for example, have as our Reality that the Earth is flat.
Element 2b:
Reality includes a set of Causality Relationships, which constitute Knowledge. A Causality Relationship informs us the outcome of actions (actions by us or by other animate and inanimate), and they should be Accurate.
The Causality Relationships of our Reality should be Accurate. We should not, for example, believe that a certain action by us will make another Human happy when it actually makes that Human sad.
The Causality Relationships of our Reality should not be that if we jump out of a window we will fly, when Physical Reality dictates that we will fall.
Beyond Consistency with Other Realities, Causality Relationships of our Reality should be Accurate for our own Reality. We should not believe that a certain action will lead to a certain Reality for us in the future when it will actually lead to a different reality.
Element 3:
Suppose there are 3 possibilities for Reality/Truth - A, B and C - all 3 of which satisfy Elements 1, 2a and 2b. Which one of the possibilities is Reality/Truth?
These 3 choices have associated outcomes for the Human, and I define the beneficial choice to be the one that produces the best outcome for the Human. If B produces the best outcome then B is the Reality/Truth. To instead say A or C is Reality/Truth is mentally unhealthy.
Based on the above description of Reality/Truth, the answer is "Yes".
Don't be weak. Have the courage to liberate Yourself from the useless idea of Death. Understand the Reality/Truth that You are Your Personality, and that Your Personality can survive forever.
If I believe that a future human is a continuation of my Life (Element 1), there is nothing in the remaining requirements for Reality/Truth (Elements 2 and 3) that can deny it.
Obviously if I believed that some random future human was a continuation of my Life, then the problem of Death would have been easily solved.
Not surprisingly, I do not believe that some random future human is a continuation of my Life. Element 1 is not so easily satisfied. The question is "What is needed for me to believe that a particular human in the future is a continuation of my Life?"
For the continuation of my Life, the crucial requirement is me identifying with My Next Iteration.
What must My Next Iteration be for me to identify with it? For me to believe it is a continuation of my Life?
The thought experiment of the next section answers the above question step by step.
Humans have a certain view of life, which is given to them by the culture they were born in. In that view of Life, Death happens when the body of their Current Iteration ends. However, this is not logical.
Now that I have already presented a Rational/Logical view of Reality/Truth I can do the following thought experiment that proceeds step by step to understand what Life means. This should help me break down the various things that make my Life, and enable me to decide what is essential or inessential for the continuation of that Life. I approached this with an open mind. There will come a time in my Life when I would want nothing more than not to Die, and this will remain my only option for defeating Death.
1) Suppose I went to sleep, and in the next room a physically identical being was created with my memories while my current body was vaporized. The physically identical body wakes up and continues with my Life. Those relationships I had continued, and the physically identical being had my social, personal, economic, professional and all other assets. Would I consider the physically identical being as a continuation of my Life?
Rational/Logical: It is a continuation. So, having the same atoms that makes up the body of My Current Iteration is not necessary for the continuation of my Life.
2) Same scenario as above, but the being is physically identical to what I was at age 21. Would I consider the physically identical being as a continuation of my Life?
Rational/Logical: It is a continuation of my Life. It is as if I entered a "rejuvenation machine" and came out as I was at age 21.
3) Same scenario as above, but the memories are transferred over time to the physically identical being by means of external technology like a video and written materials. Would I consider the physically identical being as a continuation of my Life?
Rational/Logical: No significant difference from the previous scenario, the time taken and method by which memories are transferred are not essential for the continuation of my Life.
4) Same scenario as above, but the physically identical being appears only after a gap of 50 years. Those who value their relationships with me also have physically identical beings appear as the same time as mine so those relationships can be continued. Would I consider the physically identical being as a continuation of my Life?
Rational/Logical: Again, no significant difference from the previous scenario, so it is a continuation. It would be as if I fell asleep for 50 years and then woke up. A gap of 50 years is irrelevant when a Life millions or billions of years long is possible. Not having the gap is not necessary for the continuation of my Life.
5) Same scenario as above, but the physically identical being goes through a process of development 21 years to reach maturity. Would I consider the physically identical body as a continuation of my Life?
Rational/Logical: Again, no significant difference from the previous scenario, so it is a continuation. 21 years of a happy childhood does not contradict the continuation of my Life.
My goal is to get to scenario #5, which is technologically feasible or near feasible, though uncertain in the current legal environment. I look at the steps to get to scenario #5 and none of them are significant enough to deny a continuation of my Life. No step of the progression from scenario #1 to scenario #5 breaks the continuation of Life. None is really that consequential to be a deal-breaker.
My wife is on board with me about recreating our relationship in our Next Iterations.
There will be two humans in the future: one 10 years from now and another 100 years from now. They will both have the name "Jayanta Sen". They will both look alike, genetically they will be identical (except possibly for different mtDNA and a few random mutations that affect a negligible fraction of the genome), they both will inherit some of my memories (memory storage mechanisms whether biological or digital are incomplete through time), some of my relationships (some existing relationships will end, voluntarily and involuntarily), and my economic assets (to the maximum extent allowable by law).
Due to their genetic makeup, the two humans will have similar mental, physical, and intellectual abilities and similar likes and dislikes. Research on identical twins separated at (or soon after) birth has been one of the most influential natural experiments in psychology and behavioral genetics because it lets researchers ask a simple question: How similar do people turn out when they share (nearly) 100% of their DNA but grow up in different families? It has been observed that, across decades, such twins are strikingly similar in cognitive abilities, Personality, and many life outcomes.
Is there any compelling reason for me to identify with the first human and not the second human? There is no compelling reason to regard the two differently. At best (or rather, worst) any difference is a personal choice rather than one based on Reason.
Another requirement for me to identify with a future human is that the future human identifies with me. I identify with, for example, "Jayanta Sen" circa 2015. Why? Because I feel that he made sacrifices for my benefit; I feel gratitude for that entity. Similarly, "Jayanta Sen" circa 2035 will feel gratitude for the work the present me does for the benefit of that entity. That strengthens the feeling of identity I have with "Jayanta Sen" circa 2035.
What about "Jayanta Sen" circa 2135? Will that entity feel gratitude for the work the present me does for his benefit? Of course, just like "Jayanta Sen" circa 2035 would feel gratitude. Every reason "Jayanta Sen" circa 2035 has for feeling gratitude is also true for "Jayanta Sen" circa 2135. In fact, "Jayanta Sen" circa 2135 is likely to feel more gratitude as it will take greater effort by the present me to bring him into existence.
The gratitude that "Jayanta Sen" circa 2135 would feel for the present me strengthens my identifying with that future entity.
Dying is the greatest tragedy I will experience unless I can stop it from happening. I discarded the useless and harmful ideas that could hold me back from defeating Death.
“In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer." - Albert Camus
I don't feel powerless to stop the cancer anymore. Cancer may get My Current Iteration, but I will be back again. Monitoring the PSA level to determine the progress of the cancer has become an afterthought.
No, it won't happen. The various attempts at "life extension" will only end in bitter disappointment.
Why? Because our bodies have been constructed by evolution as the optimum tradeoff between a higher activity rate and a longer lifespan.
My activity rate results in a certain rate of wear and tear for my tissues that over time will end my current body (which I was mistakenly conditioned to think of as Death). The temperature of my body can be considered as a proxy for my body's activity rate. The normal temperature is 37C (98.6F). Even a drop of only 7C (12.6F) in body temperature to 30C (86F) causes severe hypothermia that is not survivable without intervention. So no, I will not be able to extend the healthy functioning of my current body much beyond what nature gave it. Also, don't make the mistake of thinking that by lying around and not exercising I will extend my Life. My body has been designed for a certain amount of exercise and too little exercise only makes it malfunction.
The following is the abstract of my paper on this from the early 1990s:
Animals display wide diversity in lifespans. Some tantalizing empirical relationships have been observed about lifespans. One is that for mammals, lifespan increases with brain size, and decreases with size and metabolic rate. The challenge for any theory is to explain these observations. The "wear and tear" theories of lifespan postulate that the metabolic rate determines the rate of "wear and tear" of tissues and hence lifespans. However, this leaves unanswered the question why organisms with high metabolic rates possess this seemingly undesirable characteristic which reduces their lifespans. This paper proposes a theory in which lifespan and metabolic rates are the optimal response to natural constraints. Evolution chooses for an animal the optimum mix of lifespan and metabolic rate.
This theory is also a refutation of competing theories. One such theory is that lifespans are genetically coded. For some reason our genes will not allow us to be immortal. The Encyclopedia Britannica holds the view that "Locked within the code of the genetic material are instructions that specify the age beyond which a species cannot live given even the most favourable conditions" (Macropadeia Vol 26., Pg. 424). From an evolutionary standpoint this does not make sense. Why should an organism give up the chance of living longer and continue reproducing? In a population those organisms which choose to reproduce longer than others would surely gain an evolutionary advantage. Also, what genes make, man may someday unmake. If this view is true, then someday when we have unraveled the secrets of our genes then we may find a way for preventing them from killing us. Indeed, there are already no dearth of elixirs, melatonin has been in the news recently. However, the view of this paper is more pessimistic, aging occurs due to "wear and tear" and unless we can stop our tissues from wearing out (which is probably impossible) there is no elixir.
Later, instead of "metabolic rate" I preferred "activity rate". Further details are there in my book.
In Phaedo, Socrates offerd a variety of arguments in favor of the immortality of the soul. However, his followers Simmias and Cebes had doubts to which Socrates responded with more arguments.
I see this as an attempt to make the best of a bad situation. Death is imminent and relief is sought in philosophy.
No doubt philosophy may provide some relief from sadness; however, I feel the arguments in Phaedo are a bit strained. A desired conclusion was identified (the supposed immortality of the soul), and arguments were then sought to reach it. If you test Socrates' arguments for the immortality of the soul against my theory of Reality/Truth, the obvious question is Consistency with Physical Reality. If Socrates claimed that the immortal soul has no physical impact, then Consistency with Physical Reality is not violated. If the immortal soul has physical impact, then Consistency with Physical Reality is likely violated unless we subscribe to miracles which violate the laws of Physics.
Would we be satisfied with an immortal soul that has no physical impact? I would not. In our modern Scientific thinking, hypotheses gain credibility when we are able to test them, and hypotheses concerning the immortality of a soul that has no physical impact cannot be tested by the means we believe are available to us.
It is doubtful that Socrates convinced his followers, given that his passing caused them much grief, though Phaedo does say that he "covered my face and wept, not for him, but at the thought of my own calamity in having to part from such a friend".
If one asked the question, "Would an immortal soul, as described by Socrates, that did not have any physical impact be Reality/Truth?", then the answer depends upon Element 1. If the human believes that the existence of such an immortal soul be Reality/Truth, then there is nothing to contradict that belief, so the answer would be "Yes".
If one asked the question, "Would an immortal soul, as described by Socrates, that has physical impact be Reality/Truth?", then Element 2 according to our present knowledge of Science would say this is not consistent with Physical Reality.
A better approach is to completely defeat Death in both the spiritual and physical realms, something that advances in Science now make possible through Cloning and following my plan.
No, I have to go through the process of being born and nurtured to adulthood over a period of 18 or so years. The process cannot be speeded up. Why? Because in the construction of a complex structure, a faster rate of construction increases the error rate. I cannot skip ahead to the 21st year of scenario 5 of the "Second Intellectual Foundation, the Thought Experiment for a Deeper Understanding of What Life Means" above.
Similar to the activity rate and lifespans tradeoff, evolution also trades off time needed for reaching maturity and the error rate in the construction of the Human body. The time to maturity for Humans (and other living beings) is the optimum derived from this trade off and cannot be changed significantly. I have a paper on the relationship for time taken for construction, energy expended, and error rate for a sample complex structure. The formula relating the time taken for construction and the error rate is below.
All cloning and nurturing to adulthood will be done by consenting adults who will balance the costs and benefits of the services they render. The benefits of the services will include the love they will receive from the children they birth and nurture, financial payments, and the prospect of them themselves being provided the same services for their own future iterations.
More details can be found in my book.
As I have noted elsewhere, individuals can provide great ideas, but for a great project to be accomplished it needs a Community that believes. If you wish to join the Community, you can email community@iwillneverdie.com
My intellectual foundations for My Next Iteration are sound. There will be an increasing percentage of the population in the future who will choose not to die. Their numbers should increase generation by generation, and I want to be part of that future.
A spectacular future awaits Humanity. With the end of stupid destructive civil and foreign wars, Humans will finally attain everything they are capable of. They will colonize our solar system, then our galaxy and finally other galaxies. Enlightened Culture will give to millions billions quadrillions Humans their Best Possible Lives.
Human progress has opened many possibilities for us that cannot be fulfilled in only a few decades. There are friends and family I want to have spent more time with, lovers to be loved more, books to be written, countries to be visited, songs to be sung, firms to be built, and much more. Rather than the First Iteration departing with these unfulfilled desires, the Next and further Iterations will give us the time we desire.
I have been lucky to have wonderful friends and family and haven't got enough of them. I want more time with them!
There are many places in the world I want to travel to with my wife.
I tried to continue gardening after purchasing our house in 2010. The weather in southern Nevada is quite harsh, with winter temperatures dropping to -4C (~25F) and summer temperatures rising to 49C (~120F). Not surprisingly, it is difficult to keep non-native plants alive, especially as we are often traveling during the harshest summer months. One of my goals is to create beautiful gardens in My Future Iterations.
My Next Iteration will be given knowledge about my Personality that I lacked early enough, and will therefore not make the big Life mistakes I made. There will be a revolution in happiness.
Every Human's Life is very very very special. I want to keep mine. The Universe was created in a specific way that gave birth to us billions of years later.
The above is a clip from a longer video of around 8 minutes, which can be found here.
To be able to continue Life should be a basic human right available to everyone.
I have a book that goes into the details of my project to continue my Life. You can buy my book "Defeating Metastasized Cancer, Sadness and Death, My Journey" here.
If you wish to have a discussion, you can set up a one-on-one 90 minutes discussion by clicking on the button below. Time slots are Wednesday through Saturday starting 9am, 11am, 1pm, and 3pm PT (Pacific Standard Time).
My primary goal is service to humanity, but I have expenses to meet. If you feel that you are not able to afford the $1,000 fee, every Monday and Tuesday I offer one-on-one 45 minutes discussions for $100.
Some time slots may be already booked or otherwise not be available.