I actually worry about abolishing death, because then what are we? What would define the human existence? Would love be the same, without the fear of loss?
You said it quite well in your last paragraph actually. :)
Yeah why bother with fixing >20% infant mortality, or eradicating polio, or dying from infections we now easily cure with antibiotics. We should had accepted that as part of life and keep dying more, more painfully and earlier.
I don't think he's talking about improving the length of life, but instead not looking for the fountain of life, or anything else that would create those who live forever.
If we all lived forever, then there would be no children, or parents really. If we really lived forever, not drastically longer lives, Earth wouldn't be able to sustain any sort of birthrate.
So yes, we need to attempt to push death off for as long as possible, that's also part of living. Think about a world without babies, or puppies. Just middle aged people who don't die... It would be very different and no one can say good or bad, because humans are really bad at those kind of simulations. We are overly optimistic.
I really just don't know what you mean by that. I imagine a world in which no-one dies and someone asking, 'What's life?' and people still quite meaningfully pointing to living things and going 'Well, it's that.' Just as I can imagine that people who haven't grieved can still love.
Grief and death perhaps serves as a proof of love and life, I suppose. If they weren't there what would you lose? But I don't see how they're meant to have IFF relationships.