[ewretgg]

Chances are, you won't be remembered in 1000 years. And you'll be too dead to enjoy it if you are. Are you sure you have come to terms with that? Lots of people I meet here are obsessed with "making their dent in the universe" and I think some of it is driven by the fear of death.

That said, if you just want to better the lives of future generations, there are plenty of things you can do now. Give money to good causes. Get involved in politics. Plant a tree.

[melling]

Doing something that’s significant in 1000 years and being remembered are two different things.

A few thousand people trying to be Elon Musk, Edison, Ford, Carnegie, Steve Jobs, or Bill Gates can definitely do work that will impact the world for generations to come.

If you want to live on long after you’re dead, create a university, or research institution

Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, Howard Hughes Medical Institute...

Oxford University is almost 1000 years old.

[HankB99]

Do you need to be remembered to be significant? I consider them to be two different things.

For me the answer to both is to do what I can to have a positive impact on those around me. I consider my efforts as a scout leader to be the most likely thing I have done to affect our future, though I doubt I will be remembered much beyond the next generation.

[ewretgg]

You don't need to be remembered to be significant. I'm trying to see if the OP knows the difference.

I think it's great your a scout leader. It will help shape the lives of children who will outlive you. And you're doing it out of a healthy desire to help others, and not a vain quest to secure your fame after your death.

[darkmighty]

> And you'll be too dead to enjoy it if you are. Are you sure you have come to terms with that?

Honestly, I don't think it's all that easy to rule out valuing the future beyond death, or to categorically reject notions of continuation of identity beyond death. That we are a coherent, super defined identity that has a definite beginning and a definite ending is in large part a convenient, and comfortable, myth we tell ourselves. In reality ourself from moments ago is a (slightly) different being, and you from many years ago, say from your childhood, is an almost completely different being, not only physically but a completely different mind. I don't think most people have come to terms with this either (which is understandable imo because those concepts are very tricky to interpret in a non-nihilistic way); while this truth give perspective as to why other forms of propagating your impact in the world and on other people that go beyond just your future self are perhaps justified. That the continuation of part of your identity in your work, teachings, children, friends, beyond your death can be "rational".

Ultimately I think (and so seems your position) one of the main motivations people should have is to simply have a good, happy, meaningful life themselves (where meaning isn't fame or grandeur). But, again "rationally" (in a classical economic-ish sense), there's definitely a big place for helping other people and building a legacy imo, as previously justified and based on ethical principles like the Categorical Imperative[1]. Of course if everyone were singularly concerned with helping others, no one would be reaping the fruits of labor, then what would be the point of help? That's why the one's main motivation should always be your own happiness, whatever that even means.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

[ewretgg]

> Honestly, I don't think it's all that easy to rule out valuing the future beyond death

Never said it was easy. It can take years of reflection. I'm suggesting the OP do that. Their life will be a lot more pleasant and fulfilling once they do that. Otherwise, they may spend their whole lives fruitlessly chasing after immortality.

[darkmighty]

You didn't address my other points, where I question if OP should rule that out.

> Otherwise, they may spend their whole lives fruitlessly chasing after immortality.

What about spending their whole lives fruitlessly chasing egoistic hedonism?

Again you didn't present a convincing argument that it is totally fruitless. As I've said, it certainly shouldn't be one's singular goal. But I think there's a role it should play.

[ewretgg]

I didn't address your other points because I didn't disagree with them.

I think we're talking past each other. You assume my position is promoting hedonism. It's not. I believe should take time to do things to make lives better for future generations, and humanity as a whole. I find that a better way to live.

However, if your motivation for making a difference is not a concern for others, but a need to be immortal in some way, that's a sign that you have an unhealthy attitude towards death.

Given the context (We're on HN, where transhumanism is more common than in broader society)and given the way the OP phrased the question, I sensed they might be afraid of death, and not simply concerned with making an impact.

[thrav]

Genuine question that might result in some interesting discussion.

Is giving money to causes today, the best strategy?

Would it be better to amass wealth in your own name, and then deploy it more strategically later in life?

This has the added advantage of the potential to self-fund an endeavor that might do good and increase your capacity to give down the line?

If you trust yourself not to fall into greed as you grow older, what’s the downside of this, besides missing out on some tax breaks?

I guess the real answer is why not both.

Was thinking of some of the examples of “little old lady makes largest donation to X after a life of saving”.