Actually nope, not at all. You'd simply forget about past experiences and memories. The brain can't literally become full, it will just prioritize the memories and literally forget about the rest. On a daily basis this is the case already and it wouldn't have to adapt to eternal life at all.

I'm pretty sure an immortal being would (slowly but steadily) come to perceive events in the world as much less important to remember than someone who would only live for 50 to a 100 years or so.

When it comes to the total gross of knowledge ever gathered or developed, you'd have to rely on some kind of data storing technology if you want to preserve technological advancements made over many thousands or even millions of years, for your own personal benefit.

It's pretty questionable how much of a priority that would get when one is immortal though. For example, a neat old-timer car is nice, but compared to the flying car of the future that holds perhaps anti-gravity drives and so on.. what would it be worth?

I'm sure there's a lot we can simply forget about without ever feeling sorry about it.





The same kind of blatantness you're exposing your opinion by though! It's actually stupid to consider the afterlife theory of your religion as truth in the sense that word was actually meant; truthful, actual, factual, tangible, potentially reproducible and so on.

It's plain arrogant to think there is no third choice or fourth choice, just like it's actually pretty damn arrogant to think of your view as superior somehow... just because you're a convinced religious person.

I respect your view, don't get me wrong, but I do not respect these kinds of attitudes so much. Why impose your belief onto people like that? Especially when your main argument will always be that faith is required to understand (which from a more neutral point of view makes no rational sense whatsoever, but that aside).

It creates the obvious issue of a conditional truth. That in itself can not actually even be a real truth. It would just mean the exclusion or ignorance of the potential REAL truth. It's also really just an over-obvious but admittedly clever mechanism of self-preservation of certain ideas.



Physical immortality really isn't that impossible. It's possible for organisms to not age, but still reach a certain size and maturity. The whole dying thing has been an evolutionary development, quite useful too, but I think technology in the near-future will really increase both our lives and the chance of finding a way to become virtually immortal.

I'd consider potential progress like that somewhat inevitable, even though the future literally is unwritten and anything might happen.