Getting Old - How worried are you and options?

[RichA]

Being human isn't about being right and logical all the time. If it was, I wouldn't own a driver and a 60° wedge, drink whisky and smoke the odd roll up.
Sometimes it's better to be Captain Kirk than Mr Spock.

 

[Hobbit]

Mega woooooosssshhhhhhhhhh ? Is that the best the Global Moderator can come up with??

So let me put it another way.
If Darwin, Dawkins, Morris (and Atkins) are wrong then who do you trust to give you an answer?
Would you, for instance trust what a faith leader is telling you or would you trust a scientist?
Instinct will tell you they can't both be right.
Your options on getting old depend largely on your physical and mental health but most of all on your brain and how it changes over the years.

I’m not saying they’re wrong, it’s not something I’m that fussed about, but do you not think they might be wrong? Perhaps a bit simplistic a question as an opening gambit but what I’m alluding to is that science has been proven wrong before and will be again. Those guys might be 100% right but there is a possibility that something they’ve spouted as science fact does become science fiction.

Science has told us for many, many years that there are 3 states. Solid, liquid & gas. But plasma isn’t any of those three. Science also tell us there are 5 senses, and has told us that for many, many years. There are in fact 9.

You believe in the science but you haven’t proved the science. You believe it. Is that not faith in the spoken word of each of those you’ve mentioned? Blind faith? What happens to your belief if one of their points is proven to be wrong, as science sometimes is?

I’m not trying to disprove your points but I do question your lack of scepticism in the science.

 

[IanM]

Lost my mum in June this year. I have just spent the last hour doing Executor duties.

The lesson for all was that the last ten years of her life were her most financially well off....... but for most of these years, her health meant she was unable to enjoy it.

So, plan for what can be planned for, accept what you can't. Don't waste time arguing about daft stuff. If paying £300 to play JCB or Sunningdale doesn't impact your ability to keep a roof over your head or food on the table, blooming well pay it and thank your lucky stars you did! (or whatever floats your boat!)

We are only here for a visit folks

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Saw something on the TV and it got me thinking about losing my dad. Felt like no more than 10 years max but was only when I checked the date it was 18 years in August. No idea where all that time went

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Lost my mum in June this year. I have just spent the last hour doing Executor duties.

The lesson for all was that the last ten years of her life were her most financially well off....... but for most of these years, her health meant she was unable to enjoy it.

So, plan for what can be planned for, accept what you can't. Don't waste time arguing about daft stuff. If paying £300 to play JCB or Sunningdale doesn't impact your ability to keep a roof over your head or food on the table, blooming well pay it and thank your lucky stars you did! (or whatever floats your boat!)

We are only here for a visit folks

100% Agree with this.

I have minimum savings and pension compared to what I earn. But we have spent the money on taking the kids on great family holidays, and buying a house somewhere nice for them to grow up. Letting them try and participate whatever sports or activities they want. We hope they are getting a great childhood and memories of growing up.

It might mean I have to work longer or have less in retirement, but you can’t buy those memories when you are old.

I have an old mate who earns similar to me but lives like a miser. He’s always maxed out his pension and savings. His kids have never been abroad or even on a week away in this country. All their holidays are days out to free places.
Everything he buys is second hand or free from somewhere.

It’s almost like an illness that makes him save as much as he can, we think because his dad died just after he retired, he wants to retire as young as possible. He might retire early, but he’ll be bloody miserable and on his own when he does.

 

[SocketRocket]

100% Agree with this.

I have minimum savings and pension compared to what I earn. But we have spent the money on taking the kids on great family holidays, and buying a house somewhere nice for them to grow up. Letting them try and participate whatever sports or activities they want. We hope they are getting a great childhood and memories of growing up.

It might mean I have to work longer or have less in retirement, but you can’t buy those memories when you are old.

I have an old mate who earns similar to me but lives like a miser. He’s always maxed out his pension and savings. His kids have never been abroad or even on a week away in this country. All their holidays are days out to free places.
Everything he buys is second hand or free from somewhere.

It’s almost like an illness that makes him save as much as he can, we think because his dad died just after he retired, he wants to retire as young as possible. He might retire early, but he’ll be bloody miserable and on his own when he does.

My experience of such people is that when they retire they don't change, they continue to live an austere lifestyle.

 

[pendodave]

My experience of such people is that when they retire they don't change, they continue to live an austere lifestyle.

It's complicated. I grew up in a family without much. I think it stays with you for life in some cases. I dont think I'd ever be comfortable "wasting" money. Hey ho. Not the worst way to be, I guess.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I’m not saying they’re wrong, it’s not something I’m that fussed about, but do you not think they might be wrong? Perhaps a bit simplistic a question as an opening gambit but what I’m alluding to is that science has been proven wrong before and will be again. Those guys might be 100% right but there is a possibility that something they’ve spouted as science fact does become science fiction.

Science has told us for many, many years that there are 3 states. Solid, liquid & gas. But plasma isn’t any of those three. Science also tell us there are 5 senses, and has told us that for many, many years. There are in fact 9.

You believe in the science but you haven’t proved the science. You believe it. Is that not faith in the spoken word of each of those you’ve mentioned? Blind faith? What happens to your belief if one of their points is proven to be wrong, as science sometimes is?

I’m not trying to disprove your points but I do question your lack of scepticism in the science.

You are right that the "science of the day " may be, and sometimes is shown, wrong. But almost all science strives to be objective, and acknowledges proof, even if it changes what was thought to be correct .
Unlike faith.
Faith in people, and hope, is laudable ,but it has to be granted that it might sometimes be naive.
But science is what has taken us from the caves to where we are now, so that when you are ill , say, you get better because someone is over you in a gown with a scalpel, and not wearing a mask, cape and a hood ,chanting.

And it will be science that will take humans onwards, unless prejudices, unchecked emotion, myths and various faiths take us back to the dark ages.

 

[SocketRocket]

You are right that the "science of the day " may be, and sometimes is shown, wrong. But almost all science strives to be objective, and acknowledges proof, even if it changes what was thought to be correct .
Unlike faith.
Faith in people, and hope, is laudable ,but it has to be granted that it might sometimes be naive.
But science is what has taken us from the caves to where we are now, so that when you are ill , say, you get better because someone is over you in a gown with a scalpel, and not wearing a mask, cape and a hood ,chanting.

And it will be science that will take humans onwards, unless prejudices, unchecked emotion, myths and various faiths take us back to the dark ages.

Surely there's a difference between medical science and astro physics. I agree that in past times the church, due to the ignorance of medical knowledge, was all that was available to ill people. There is still so much we do not understand so it's difficult to write off the 'creation' theory. Someone said we have only pulled aside a curtain and taken a peep through at the universe.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Surely there's a difference between medical science and astro physics. I agree that in past times the church, due to the ignorance of medical knowledge, was all that was available to ill people. There is still so much we do not understand so it's difficult to write off the 'creation' theory. Someone said we have only pulled aside a curtain and taken a peep through at the universe.

The insurmountable problem about "creation" is this
That, expressly or by implication, it asserts that some intelligence made everything in the Universe including its processes, consequences and outcomes, as well as its content.

Furthermore, most faiths believing this, also assert that this intelligence is so omnipotent that it is aware of those processes, consequences etc before the whole thing is created. They also assert that this intelligence is all loving in a fatherly way.

Now, how can it be that such an intelligence having the ability to foresee all the pain, cruelty, grief that has been created ( dreadful diseases, tortures by some animals on others and their own species, including humans) nevertheless decided to carry on and create it?

In our world any designer ( and there must be some on this forum whose profession that is/was) would love to know the full knowledge of how his design would turn out, and exactly how it would function in its lifetime. Because if he knew that , and there were grave faults, he would either abandon the design , or correct it before creating it.

And the faiths do assert that such a perfect design is possible because they call it Heaven, Nirvana or whatever and expect/ hope to go there.

As I say, to me, an insurmountable barrier to acceptance.

 

[Captainron]

Just have as much fun as I can every day. I’m nearly 45 and could die on any given day. Got the usual financial stuff in place to make sure the family is looked after when I die.

Said it before that too many people are living too bloody long nowadays and folk think that 80 is no age to die nowadays! Unreal.

 

[SocketRocket]

The insurmountable problem about "creation" is this
That, expressly or by implication, it asserts that some intelligence made everything in the Universe including its processes, consequences and outcomes, as well as its content.

Furthermore, most faiths believing this, also assert that this intelligence is so omnipotent that it is aware of those processes, consequences etc before the whole thing is created. They also assert that this intelligence is all loving in a fatherly way.

Now, how can it be that such an intelligence having the ability to foresee all the pain, cruelty, grief that has been created ( dreadful diseases, tortures by some animals on others and their own species, including humans) nevertheless decided to carry on and create it?

In our world any designer ( and there must be some on this forum whose profession that is/was) would love to know the full knowledge of how his design would turn out, and exactly how it would function in its lifetime. Because if he knew that , and there were grave faults, he would either abandon the design , or correct it before creating it.

And the faiths do assert that such a perfect design is possible because they call it Heaven, Nirvana or whatever and expect/ hope to go there.

As I say, to me, an insurmountable barrier to acceptance.

The view you have regarding an uncaring creator seems to be one that looks at religion through the eyes of people that have have decided to accept what others say without making the effort to look into the subject in detail with an unbiased mind and really study the actual scriptures.

When I was a younger man I had exactly the same view that you hold. I knew a very clever Scientist who was also a devout Christian and I had some long and deep discussions with him that made me open my mind to the subject and accept there was much more to consider than the narrow view I held.

I'm not a member of any church and disagree with much of what they teach, especially the mainstream Christian churches. I've posted some views on this subject in previous forum discussions and don't really want to open the subject to open discussion here as it always ends up badly.

If you would like to discuss it by PM then I'm quite happy to do that. I'll dig out one of my previous posts if I can find it.

 

[rosecott]

Just have as much fun as I can every day. I’m nearly 45 and could die on any given day. Got the usual financial stuff in place to make sure the family is looked after when I die.

Said it before that too many people are living too bloody long nowadays and folk think that 80 is no age to die nowadays! Unreal.

Are you talking about me?

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Just have as much fun as I can every day. I’m nearly 45 and could die on any given day. Got the usual financial stuff in place to make sure the family is looked after when I die.

Said it before that too many people are living too bloody long nowadays and folk think that 80 is no age to die nowadays! Unreal.

Hope it ain't unreal. Just round the corner for me?
And when you are in your seventies ( so far away isn't it??), so will you.

 

[stefanovic]

You are right that the "science of the day " may be, and sometimes is shown, wrong. But almost all science strives to be objective, and acknowledges proof, even if it changes what was thought to be correct .
Unlike faith.

Science is always work in progress. Faith is fixed and largely based on the supernatural from a dark age before science.
Faith leaders will tell you that the theory of evolution is ONLY a theory, purely because it contradicts their own book of creation.
Well, it was just a theory when first described but it has passed every test in over 160 years.

Faith in people, and hope, is laudable ,but it has to be granted that it might sometimes be naive.

Faith is ignorant, controlling, scaring, authoritarian too.

But science is what has taken us from the caves to where we are now, so that when you are ill , say, you get better because someone is over you in a gown with a scalpel, and not wearing a mask, cape and a hood ,chanting.

Yet some will still send for the witch doctor.

And it will be science that will take humans onwards, unless prejudices, unchecked emotion, myths and various faiths take us back to the dark ages.

Let's sure hope not.

Excellent post!

 

[Swinglowandslow]

The view you have regarding an uncaring creator seems to be one that looks at religion through the eyes of people that have have decided to accept what others say without making the effort to look into the subject in detail with an unbiased mind and really study the actual scriptures.

When I was a younger man I had exactly the same view that you hold. I knew a very clever Scientist who was also a devout Christian and I had some long and deep discussions with him that made me open my mind to the subject and accept there was much more to consider than the narrow view I held.

I'm not a member of any church and disagree with much of what they teach, especially the mainstream Christian churches. I've posted some views on this subject in previous forum discussions and don't really want to open the subject to open discussion here as it always ends up badly.

If you would like to discuss it by PM then I'm quite happy to do that. I'll dig out one of my previous posts if I can find it.

Thanks for the invite, but I'll leave it. No slight intended, I just think you have your view and I have mine. Fair enough. And we'll leave it as is here.
Take care ?

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Science is always work in progress. Faith is fixed and largely based on the supernatural from a dark age before science.
Faith leaders will tell you that the theory of evolution is ONLY a theory, purely because it contradicts their own book of creation.
Well, it was just a theory when first described but it has passed every test in over 160 years.


Faith is ignorant, controlling, scaring, authoritarian too.


Yet some will still send for the witch doctor.


Let's sure hope not.

Excellent post!

Just for clarity , Stef.

I did say "faith IN people , and hope, is laudable. " Not meaning faith as in religious belief, but in the broadest sense, like confidence in people etc.
That's how I meant it.

 

[chrisd]

I feel old age has suddenly crept up on me and Mrs D but I feel that it is only a number

I have never, and still dont, feel "old" - yes, I started work at 15 and still doing a bit at 69 and will probably be about 3 years before a project I'm doing will end. Mrs D and I enjoy holidays abroad and are planning to go to Australia and New Zealand for a cruise this year. I enjoy 2 or 3 rounds of golf a week and like them to be competitive, will still kick a ball round with my son (38) and play rough and tumble with the grand children.

On the downside i have prostate cancer which has slightly worsened and I'm due to see what's to be done about it, but, on the upside my hips were replaced when needed, and other issues are being dealt with

I wont want to be around if Mrs D and I cant care for ourselves though, I hope to see our grandchildren grow up before that!

 

[stefanovic]

Just for clarity , Stef.

I did say "faith IN people , and hope, is laudable. " Not meaning faith as in religious belief, but in the broadest sense, like confidence in people etc.
That's how I meant it.

Fair enough!
It's just that I shudder at any mention of the word faith.
The dark cloud of faith always seems to hang over us.

I would advise to question everything, like the meaning of life, and not simply accept what faith leaders are saying.

Of the 105 billion or so people (Homo Sapiens) that have ever existed on earth, how many have ever known the true answer to the meaning of life?
I'm guessing not more than a few thousand.
It wasn't until 1953 that the DNA molecule was understood.
Not only is that is within my own lifetime but it was discovered only about 100 miles away from where I was born.
So in all human history and geography only people alive after 1953 can possibly have known this.
Units of information called genes give us a further answer as to the meaning of life. But again, how many people have ever got their head around this?
There is quite probably a still deeper meaning.

 

[Crow]

Fair enough!
It's just that I shudder at any mention of the word faith.
The dark cloud of faith always seems to hang over us.

I would advise to question everything, like the meaning of life, and not simply accept what faith leaders are saying.

Of the 105 billion or so people (Homo Sapiens) that have ever existed on earth, how many have ever known the true answer to the meaning of life?
I'm guessing not more than a few thousand.
It wasn't until 1953 that the DNA molecule was understood.
Not only is that is within my own lifetime but it was discovered only about 100 miles away from where I was born.
So in all human history and geography only people alive after 1953 can possibly have known this.
Units of information called genes give us a further answer as to the meaning of life. But again, how many people have ever got their head around this?
There is quite probably a still deeper meaning.

Why does life have to have a meaning? It just is.
You're looking around for something you want that can't be found. (To borrow from a great philosopher)