Would you avoid getting emotionally attached to other people if you were immortal?

So my college professor decided to have my class watch "The Age Of Adaline" (rather mediocre film. Blake Lively & Harrison Ford were brilliant in the movie but the execution of the story & the exploration of it's themes were rather half baked) which led me to ask the question:

Should a person avoid getting emotionally attached to other people if they were immortal? too spare themselves from grief if said other people die?

Well, of course not

Nah, at some point people are going to leave your life no matter what, this is just on a larger scale. No biggie.

If I were immortal I'd be too busy traveling the world on some Batman training montage type shit.

I try to do that anyway, mostly successful.

No, that would ruin a big point of living.

As much as we might not want to admit it, we will always be able to move on from loss - especially if we were immortal and had an endless amount of time to process. It is possible to treasure the memory of someone without having it hold you back. A life without emotional attachment would be very sad.

I think it would depend on what kind of person the immortal would be. The worry with some people, is that, they may become callous or apathetic to others, if they suffer so much loss that they become numb to it, overwhelmed by it, or how they value things such as mortal life changes drastically, in ways that may seem as bad. Of course… others being immortal, will have a lot of time to contemplate, consider and reflect introspectively on such things and the ideals and values they should hold going forward… and although the pain of losing mortal friends would be painful and tough, they would seek to endure through it, because of the value and positives associated.

There have been a few comic stories that have touched on the idea as well. There was one where Hercules funded and built a… I think it was a hospital or care facility for monster children and babies? Was on some unknown, mysterious island, one of the people who worked there explained to some visitors that many of its residents/children liked Hercules and his frequent visits. Some of them were terminal, but knowing that the immortal Hercules would always remember them was special. I imagine that Hercules himself, whilst would be saddened by those special children, would also make a special place in his heart and memory for all of them. Then again that issue was sad because Hercules had died so… Thor as well, in the future will probably create and name a river, mountain, lake, and more after every mortal friend and over he has ever had. How do you get to New York from here? Well, go down Jane River, then at Pym Park, cross to the River of Steve, follow that till you get to Barton Mountain, travel through the Jarvis Forest and then cross Lake Wanda to get to well… the ruins of New York.

Interesting question definitely.

Hard to say. I think I would try to stay attached to people at least for a generation or two. If the pain of the losses became to great I might stop. On the other hand, I might develop a sense of proportion about it and realize what such attachments bring to my life. Again, it's REALLY hard to say.

Great question.

Interesting question. I would have to say no. I already go into all my relationships with a very open mind, expecting them to not last forever and just see how things develop. I do not plan on getting married or have children, so when I date someone, it really is because I value that person and want to spend time with them. We can make plans for the future, but nothing is set in stone. So no, I would just continue as I am now, with death being a final, sort of macabre stop to our relationship, if we ever last that long.

I take my first response back. I'd become like Olgeird von Everec and have a heart of stone.

I'll be your Gaunter if you'll be my Olgeird.

@rogueshadow: I'll come up with harder conditions for the contract. Can't fool me twice Master Mirror!!

Quite the contrary.

Logically speaking mortality and emotions do not really have a correlation. You don’t care about your dog, for example, because you or it is mortal. You care about the said dog simply because you do, it connects to you. Your emotional example comes in here too if you think about it because just about every time the dogs tend to die before the owner, something the owner are well aware in advance. That does not make the dog any less adorable to the owner or any less attached.

Mortal or immortal, everybody wants to be loved. The idea of not being emotionally attached to someone because you are going to outlive him/her seems rather weird to be honest.

I see no reason to avoid it anymore than one would if mortal. Death is as much a part of life as life and trying to run from it is cowardly and, more so, pointless.

yes, and i would value every second with those people

Probably. Anyway, being immortal would suck. Eventually, you'd just be floating through space, in endless pain.

Yes. Your perception of time is dictated by how long you've lived. When you're younger, a year seems forever. That is because its a lot of time in proportion to how long you have lived.

Consequently, the longer you live, the quicker your perception of time. Years will pass very quickly, eventually decades will, eventually centuries will, etc.

Ultimately,once you reach a certain age(maybe when you're a thousand? maybe 10 thousand? Maybe 100,000 thousand years?), the average person's life span will be like a blink of an eye to you. Do you think you'll really want to form relationships with people or care about events/society when, from your perspective, who live as long as a betta fish/worker ant/fly?

You think you can grow close to and then watch your loved ones die, before you, an infinite amount of times----without growing jaded about their companionship and jaded towards their relationships, with which only lasts for a fleeting moment from your perspective? And you would continue to make these relationships and continue to be hurt emotionally when they end?

Two possibilities: Either you grow jaded because these relationships don't last comparatively long and you stop getting attached to them for that reason, their deaths don't hurt you--because their lives are like insects to you. In which case, you're not that emotionally attached. Or, you continue to be able to attach emotionally to human beings with miniscule lifespans, and eventually the pain from watching so many die causes you to recluse yourself from society/these relationships to stop it from continuing.

You haven't really thought this through... Logically speaking, people attach to animals/people because they offer companionship. Living forever while everyonelse dies will certainly inhibit your ability to feel like other people can offer you companionship. It will more assuredly inhibit your ability to connect with people, because your experiences in life are so different. "My mom just died...." "Yeah, my mom died 10,000 years ago. And thousands of my wives and offspring had died since then... I certainly feel empathy for your loss".

It's not as cut and dry as you make it sound, friend. Yeah there is always the pain of loss but that doesn't really prevent people from doing the same thing again.

Going back to the same dog example, a dog owner knows his dog is going to die before him. They still get attached. The dog dies earlier as expected, the owner is sad. But in most cases the owner then moves to the next dog and the same cycle continues.

Is there a reason the same can't happen perpetually if you are immortal. I suppose no one can say with any degree of certainty because well we don't know an actual immortal. But while you will suffer grief over loss, in sever cases you might go through depression, but with time it all heals and you are bound to go right back to the same circle.

You are going to lament how say X died before you and left you alone and this happens again and again. You are going to be extremely sad for a certain period but you can't stay sad for eternity. Sooner or later you will learn to move on with that.

Also are you sure you are going to feel the same grief on a loss of a partner the first time as it would be 20,000th time? It probably would not. The possibility of you getting used to that grief is higher than the possibility of human being choosing to live in complete isolation.

At first no but I guess eventually yes

After a while, I imagine an immortal person just wouldn't bother to get too attached to people. They'd probably still have various levels of interactions with people, but anything too deep and intimate seems pointless.

That's a false dichotomy. Not getting emotionally attached does not equate to choosing to live in complete isolation. That's not an either or scenario. I could have a heartbreak and instead of never dating women ever again, only date women for sex and short term pleasure before replacing them with new women.

I like this dog analogy: I think the reality is that if an immortal is approaching their relationship with a human like a person does with a dog---that simply replaces the dog each time they die---they are likely not that emotionally attached. The ease with which some pet owners can replace their pet certainly indicates their level of emotional attachment is not the same degree as with an actual person. The contours of a relationship and uniqueness of an individual person is certainly a higher level than that of a person's relationship with a dog, who cannot communicate with them or understand their emotions on a deep level(so really, what is the difference between replacing a dog with another dog that gives you the same love? They provide the same thing). But, at a certain point, the immortal will feel like a regular person can identify with them as much as a dog can identify with a person. And, that is why their level of emotional attachment will be weak. And your point supports mine: If your level of grief has diminished for each time you lose a person, can you really say you were that emotionally attached to them?

What you're not really considering is the time aspect of it. How emotionally attached do you think someone who lives 70 years, who has seen multiple deaths of pets and loved ones, is feeling towards a gerbil that only lives 3-5 years? How does anything the gerbil do match up with the experiences of the 70 year old who has experienced such a fuller life? That is I imagine what its like for someone who's lived thousands of years, through several different cultures, and gone through countless heartbreaks, is feeling when they are interacting with a regular human being.

Answer me this: Let's say a butterfly starts acting affectionate towards you right now when you're out on the grass. "Aww what a cute butterfly!" You lightly pet it. You know that any second it may leave you and you may never see it again, in the back of your mind. How emotionally attached do you get to this butterfly? How emotionally attached do people get to the dogs of strangers, who they stop to pet, when they know they will never see them again after 5 seconds of petting? (Analogy)

Pfftt emotions. Who needs those? I sure would get physically attached though.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Probably not. I would just learn how to say good bye.

Well I suppose it depends on what kind of person you are. Personal preferences would dictate those I would presume.

Human beings don’t just crave physical attachment; we are hardwired to crave emotional connection be it with parents, family, pets, potential mates etc. Emotional attachment as you say is not that easy to detach yourself from. I suppose there would be few boys who would claim they do not care about love and stuffs but truth is everyone does, to different degree. We are just biologically hardwired to crave attention, admiration and above all keen-ship especially with the opposite sex.

Before you get to the dog example and thank you for liking it, let’s look at a more practical scenario. I am going to do something very immoral and for the discussion I am going to link break ups with death, as under both scenarios what eventually happens is your relationship comes to an end. Has break ups permanently affected people from ever dating again. While it does happen it’s very rare. Most people lament about it but when you eventually do get emotionally attached most often than not it’s not because you wanted to get emotionally attached in the first place. It just happens. We are biologically hardwired to do so.

Problem here is I do not think there is an out and out right and a wrong answer because truth is, in some ways we are different as an individual and be it mortal and immortal we are probably going to behave differently. Obviously everything I am saying is mostly out of my perspective, I am just trying my level best to make it sound more generalized. But what I do admit is there is always going to be a kind of bias given your personality in the way you would choose to see the said issue.

I like this dog analogy: I think the reality is that if an immortal is approaching their relationship with a human like a person does with a dog---that simply replaces the dog each time they die---they are likely not that emotionally attached. The ease with which some pet owners can replace their pet certainly indicates their level of emotional attachment is not the same degree as with an actual person.

Ah! that's not actually something I can argue completely again. However, I can see where our view differ, maybe its to do with the knd of personality we each possess, who knows, I am merely speculating.

Yes emotional attachment for a dog and a human being most likely is going to be different. I am a dog owner myself and so far since my childhood I have lost 3 dogs (Sheru, Dolly and Pintoo). So let me share you a real life story from my perspective. I missed each one of them and I would say I was extremely attached to all of them. I know my whole family struggle to maintain their diet once the dogs passed away. We could barely eat for 2 days; while no one would say it out loud everyone was rather sad. That never stopped us from adopting yet another dog.

It normally always started the same way; I am going to draw my dad’s perspective here. He hated the dogs each time we got one because he as asthma and he hate the fact that the dog keeps shedding its fur. Since we used to keep them indoors he used to always complain how it affects him. Complains, as time went on, would decrease and sooner or later (while he never outright admitted) he got really attached to the dogs, each one of them.

Now I am not an immortal and can’t say anything with absolute certainty from that perspective but I believe we are likely to endure more of the same. The more fleeting love becomes in one’s life people are more likely to learn how to enjoy the brief fleeting moments rather than be completely detached to it. Everyone seeks love and admiration, so emotional attachment isn’t something you will have a complete control over, at least that’s my perspective.

The contours of a relationship and uniqueness of an individual person is certainly a higher level than that of a person's relationship with a dog, who cannot communicate with them or understand their emotions on a deep level(so really, what is the difference between replacing a dog with another dog that gives you the same love? They provide the same thing). But, at a certain point, the immortal will feel like a regular person can identify with them as much as a dog can identify with a person. And, that is why their level of emotional attachment will be weak. And your point supports mine: If your level of grief has diminished for each time you lose a person, can you really say you were that emotionally attached to them?

Hehe I suppose I am talking from my perspective but the level of emotional attachment and the grief of an eventual end of the relationship might not be correlated when the said end of the relationship becomes inevitable. You see, I would think you are more likely to be just as emotionally attached, or even more so, because you know it’s fleeting. For you, the whole emotional attachment, would rather be so much more important because you know, relative to you, the person is going to live so much less.

But I think we are both talking from individual perspective rather than generalized thing.

What you're not really considering is the time aspect of it. How emotionally attached do you think someone who lives 70 years, who has seen multiple deaths of pets and loved ones, is feeling towards a gerbil that only lives 3-5 years?

I am guessing my answer is going to surprise you but I would say you would get attached even more because you would not, beforehand, that this emotional attachment is fleeting and would rather try to admire every bit of it as much as possible. You see, just because something won't last forever does not diminish it's impact, in fact, the shorter the life span of the said gerbil the more attached you are likely to be, because you know you love, you kinship is going to last that much shorter.

How does anything the gerbil do match up with the experiences of the 70 year old who has experienced such a fuller life? That is I imagine what its like for someone who's lived thousands of years, through several different cultures, and gone through countless heartbreaks, is feeling when they are interacting with a regular human being.

To make it less personal, how many people do you know that are in love who are identical to each other in the way they think. Opposite attracts, its this difference of experience, the chance to share yours maybe help out your beloved, is likely to take over. You see, while the say an immortal think vs the way a mortal think may be different, but that may not be enough to prevent an emotional attachment. If anything you are in a better position to protect, teach and nurture your beloved and given the chance your emotional attachment is likely to increase.

You would have so much to talk about because you know so many things, you've seen so many things and the other hasn't. You have lived through centuries, think of how many cool stories you could share. Think about how much useful advice you could impart to your beloved. In return, you are going to receive love and affection from the other side. This should just increase the level of emotional attachment.

It's like saying if you know a person has a terminal disease, does that mean it's impossible to be emotionally attached to him/her?

Answer me this: Let's say a butterfly starts acting affectionate towards you right now when you're out on the grass. "Aww what a cute butterfly!" You lightly pet it. You know that any second it may leave you and you may never see it again, in the back of your mind. How emotionally attached do you get to this butterfly? How emotionally attached do people get to the dogs of strangers, who they stop to pet, when they know they will never see them again after 5 seconds of petting?

Not much in both cases because neither the butterfly nor the pet was mine till the day it died. If it was a neighbors pet that I get to see for say 12 years till it died I am sure I would be extremely emotionally attached. The part were we disagree is, whether short or long, if you feel that someone actually loves and cares about you, you are more than likely to replicate the same emotions eventually. This would not chance if the person has a terminal disease and is going to die next year, I am sure cases like this has even happened though I do not know of any.

But I suppose a better course of action would be to agree to disagree. I fear we are two individual with a completely different set of beliefs, specially towards the idea of emotional attachment and hence the disagreement. Though that being said, I was actually enjoying this, talking about emotional attachment and possibility of how an immortal would feel.

Nah, I'd probably just live out several lives.

Yes, one.

I mean if I get emotionally attached to a single person and live through life married, and even though I know shes going to die first, its a possibllity in every marriage, someone is going to first you just don't know who, in this case however you know you won't die first. I'd probably die with her, bullet to the brain, ect.

((in my perspective, and by immortal you just meant ageless))

Edit: But if I wasn't the one, and I knew they were immortal I wouldn't, because they may not think how I do, and instead of doing what I stated above, they could've already have married a lot of other men in the past, so I couldn't possibly accept.

No I'd enjoy the ride while it lasts. Shit, if I was immortal id do alot more than build random emotional attachments.

There are levels of closeness. I think the main question is if you would want to keep getting married or how many children you'd want to have. Having friends or acquaintances isn't really that much of an attachment.

@claymore1998: How would you describe your relationships with your dog? What do pets provide for you?

While I do agree a lot of your opinions are understandable as from a different perspective---I have to disagree with you when it comes to your break up/death analogy. I think a common theme explored in movies, books, tv shows is that people with a lot of relationships may have past baggage that effects the quality of their future relationships. Sometimes this baggage effects their ability to trust or their ability to show weakness, but I think mostly it effects their willingness, the ease, at which they are willing to end relationships and move on to new ones. Do you really think a man or woman is as emotionally attached to the 20th person they've been in a relationship with, as say the first or second person, when the experience is new and they feel like it may last forever? If people are consciously or unconsciously going to adapt to feelings of heartbreak, it seems counter intuitive that they would go through it many times, and not put up mechanisms to prevent it from harming them at the same level once they see it as inevitable. Of course, as regular people, we hope to find a significant other that, even though they may die before us, we hope to grow old with and journey through life with. The immortal doesn't have that same luxury. Which is why someone who constantly breaks up with lovers while they're on their search for the right one(who they presumably don't plan on breaking up with) is not seeing the world through the same perspective as someone who will always watch their lover die before them a.k.a. will always and inevitably break up with their lover, following your analogy.

I'm moderately sure that the more you experience something, the less dopamine you get from it. I've never personally done drugs, but I'm aware that long term use of certain drugs makes it necessary to ingest/take higher amounts, because your body may not produce the same amount of the feeling that it did the first time. Another example is your tastebuds getting used to chocolate/certain flavors if you ingest enough without long enough breaks, and it not tasting as great as the first time. I doubt an immortal is going to be experiencing the same level of feelings--intimacy, attachment, etc.---his 999th time as his 1st or 2nd or 3rd. I know there are chemicals related to long-term commitment, I doubt he will ever see a lover as a long-term commitment.

This

And this. I'll do many crazy things too that I'd never do normally.

nope

Being an immortal, well that's something. They're ups and downfalls due to this divine power. Immortality doesn't come at a price of healthy living. They're certain consequences that people often forget, things that would affect them in a great degree. For example, as many have stated above is loosing someone that you were greatly emotionally attached for to. It feels like a piece of your heart as been torn away, causing you crucial pain. Being an immortal, there is no doubt you are going to loose more than 10 people in your life, 10 pieces of your heart torn away, shredding you painfully. The again, some of you chose the easy way out, isolating yourself in space or a certain dark area in Earth. But is that really the best way though? Do you wish to live by yourself for eternity? A lonely life, no one that cares about you or know you exist. A being that is worthless amount others, although you have the gift worth more than all the money on Earth. The irony. Well here are some pros and cons into this discussion.

The pros would be that you don't have to deal with getting old and weak. You don't have to ever worry about getting sick. You can have plenty of time to experience all sorts of things in life. You could potentially get really really good at things because you'd have more practice and experience that is normally humanly possible.

The cons would be that people might catch on to the fact that you never age or get sick and you would be viewed as some kind of freak of nature that people might want to experiment on. Also, you'd have to end up seeing everyone die that you ever know while you keep on living.

If you were truly immortal and could not possibly ever die, then you'd have the added pro of never having to worry about dying or getting killed. You'd be invincible. But you'd have the con of going crazy from living too long. If you were really immortal and couldn't ever die, you'd go through millions of years during which you'd have seen everything and done everything and gotten to know hundreds of thousands of people that all end up dying and you'd get bored and weird and time would start to fly by in your perception relative to how long you've lived. So it would seem like people are born and then die in a brief time that isn't even worth your effort of getting to know them. You'd go insane. And yet, you'd still have billions of years left ahead of you. You'd see the human race eventually get extinct and still you'd have billions of years left to wonder the earth alone. Then the earth would explode and you'd be floating around in space for a million, billion, trillion years all alone. And that would be only the beginning.

The final question is, is immortality is as good as people think it is? Or is it actually much worse than people often think it is? It all depends how you want to to interpret immortality. It can be a gift, or it can be a curse. Maybe the best way, is doing half of each. You live with the people you love, meet them and greet them, and just slip away as silent as the night. Never to return but feeling much better that you don't have to witness their final breaths. It all depends on you.

This. (Well said)

No, because I'd want to watch my wife, son, grandson and so on grow old. I'd watch over them for as long as I can

Probably no

No,we are always getting new friends and losing many old ones already even as mortals.

No

Make a friend for one decade leave them, then be alone for two decades then repeat.

I would love to be immortal.

It basically the same thing as should you get emotionally attached to your grandparents and even parents? Chances are you will out live them.

This movie sucked.

I imagine yes, not intentionally nor too drastically but it has to change doesn't it?

@rabumalal: IKR?

I'd do what frieza wanted to do with immortality.

"For the first century I'll go easy on them. Lure them into a false sense of security. When they finally convinced themselves that I'm not so bad, I'll go full tyrant. Then I'll disappear for a millennia or so, make them question if I ever existed. Finally when they are convinced that I was a myth, I'll come back and kill them all."

the hell with relationships , i have freaking inmortality!