Drawing the Line in Rubinshteinic Individualism

(Immortality Directory: https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-danger-of-immortality)

As some of you may already know, I am an advocate for solitude. My personal philosophy, AKA Rubinshteinic Individualism, has solitude as a prime subject around which it revolves. I highlight the importance of solitude for our development as individuals, even if we choose not to be complete hermits in this day and age of connectivity.

However, a life of pure isolation, a.k.a. solitary confinement, is where I draw the line. Let it be known that by "solitude" I don't mean "solitary confinement" whatsoever.

To wrap it all up, I have a story to tell you. Imagine yourself being alone, whether by will or force, but when you want to get out of your isolation, you cannot — for eternity. Imagine, in other words, being completely isolated from the world, with nothing to do, with the addition of being immortal.

This is a scene from an RPG game called Mother 3.

Close to the end of the game, you fight the main antagonist (who was also the previous game’s antagonist), called Porky Minch. Porky Minch in this game became a dictator and used intensive time travel and brainwashing devices to make almost everyone in an isolated region of islands submit to him. Because he spent so much time traveling, he became immortal, only being able to die by killing himself.

Minch’s life was very difficult; he was terribly and constantly abused by his parents, and thus had a traumatic childhood. This trauma caused him to become a megalomaniac, eventually becoming an all-evil villain.Arguably, he was the reason for this game’s entire plot simply because he was bored. However, it's theorized that Minch wanted to destroy existence as compensation for his traumatic suffering, because when you destroy the world or universe, you also destroy everyone who hates you, and he explicitly states this in the game.

In the fight against him, he got defeated. However, instead of being killed like the rest of the enemies, he summons a special capsule called the "Absolutely Safe Capsule" and goes into it to protect himself. However, since this capsule is so safe, anyone who enters it cannot go out for eternity. That is the price of absolute safety from the world.

Although he was a very evil villain, he gave himself an inevitable and miserable fate: to be locked inside a capsule forever, with no possibility of ever coming out. The creator himself said in an interview, that Porky would be there even after billions of years! By the way, the capsule is also indestructible.

Just imagine how it feels to be in the same place for years and years, and not do anything. Only a few mentally-immune people would survive such harsh, yet safe conditions, while being immortal. You cannot do anything but stay there and think, and all of your previous life is gone for good. There are no people (this capsule is an isolated underground), no hobbies, no work, and no hope of ever escaping; you are alone with your thoughts.

I would imagine Porky being driven to insanity as he loses his sense of time, and being in a continuous inner war to preserve the sanity he has. He went from being a god-like worshiping, all-powerful leader to an insignificant, hopeless individual who would never hear anything but his own thoughts and speech and see the same internal capsule for eternity.

Even I, a dedicated loner, am doubtful if I can endure such extreme hardship. I may very well like being alone, but definitely not when I have nothing productive to do. I won't be able to read or write, nor go to the gym or listen to music—all I can do is nothing. And if I am to be immortal in such a situation, I could never do anything, and instead, remain paralyzed by my own forced, ultimate safety.

All of this makes me wonder if such a verdict fits the sins of the evil Porky Minch. I think execution would be a better sentence. If I'm going to be alone, at least give me something to do and something to think about!

Let this be known regarding my and this site's philosophy, that society is only necessary for an extant, and yet, it is absolutely necessary, even if at a minimal portion. I am in no way an advocate of a voluntary solitary confinement—one that remains for days, weeks, or even months. We should therefore be able to distinguish between periods of solitude, where you have more freedom, and between solitary confinement, where you are enslaved by law or authority to suffer at disproportionate degrees.