The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant

by Nick Bostrom

A philosophical parable about death.

Genres: Philosophy, Fiction, Short Stories, Fantasy, Essays, Science Fiction, Death

18 pages, Unknown Binding

First published January 1, 2005

About the author

Nick Bostrom is Professor at Oxford University, where he is the founding Director of the Future of Humanity Institute. He also directs the Strategic Artificial Intelligence Research Center. He is the author of some 200 publications, including Anthropic Bias (Routledge, 2002), Global Catastrophic Risks (ed., OUP, 2008), Human Enhancement (ed., OUP, 2009), and Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (OUP, 2014), a New York Times bestseller.

Bostrom holds bachelor degrees in artificial intelligence, philosophy, mathematics and logic followed by master’s degrees in philosophy, physics and computational neuroscience. In 2000, he was awarded a PhD in Philosophy from the London School of Economics.
He is recipient of a Eugene R. Gannon Award (one person selected annually worldwide from the fields of philosophy, mathematics, the arts and other humanities, and the natural sciences). He has been listed on Foreign Policy's Top 100 Global Thinkers list twice; and he was included on Prospect magazine's World Thinkers list, the youngest person in the top 15 from all fields and the highest-ranked analytic philosopher. His writings have been translated into 24 languages. There have been more than 100 translations and reprints of his works. During his time in London, Bostrom also did some turns on London’s stand-up comedy circuit.

Nick is best known for his work on existential risk, the anthropic principle, human enhancement ethics, the simulation argument, artificial intelligence risks, the reversal test, and practical implications of consequentialism. The bestseller Superintelligence, and FHI’s work on AI, has changed the global conversation on the future of machine intelligence, helping to stimulate the emergence of a new field of technical research on scalable AI control.

More: https://nickbostrom.com

Reviews

[Alien Bookreader · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fable was a good choice for this message. We are used to death and have built religions and world views around the idea that life only has value because it is temporary.

But how can we know that this is true if we have never had any options besides life being temporary?

Thus far we have been forced to accept death and find meaning in it. But if we were no longer forced, how would we cope? Probably badly, as this fable suggests. Most people would stick to their sunken cost beliefs. But for some people, freedom from death would be a valuable thing.

[V · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fable that acts as a placeholder for ageing & how we as a civilisation have become habituated to assuming it to be part of the natural order of things. But we are humans, the most dominant & influential species on earth. It is not our disposition to give up in the face of tribulations. Therefore, we must collectively do whatever is in our dominion to expand the human health span. In this manner, we will remain healthful, energetic, & productive at ages at which we would otherwise bite the dust.

[Frederik Creemers · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this. I'm still thinking about the moral. It sparked several interesting discussions with friends and family, around research funding, so if that's something you find interesting, give this a read. If it's not, you still really should give this a read.

[Aljoša Toplak · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nothing wrong with the message, which shouldn’t be controversial at all (death=bad; let’s minimize bad; therefore, society should put its resources into battling aging and disease), it’s just that it treats the reader like a complete idiot. Not my kind of literary taste.

[Jinan · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The dragon-administration provided many jobs that would be lost if the dragon was slaughtered. There was no known social good coming from the conquest of the dragon."

Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, the amount of metaphors!

"Let us grant that this woman is correct about the science and that the project is technologically possible, although I don’t think that has actually been proven. Now she desires that we get rid of the dragon. Presumably, she thinks she’s got the right not to be chewed up by the dragon. How willful and presumptuous."

[Bridget · Rating 3 out of 5]

There's a lot going on here. Alas, it read like a tech bro's essay for Philosophy 10. There wasn't much nuance here, and I don't really think it accomplished what it set out to do? War, capitalism, greed, bystander mindset, doom, nihilistic compliance, I think this parable has the potential to do more than just consider the inevitability of death whether that was the intention or not.

https://nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.pdf

[Alfie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rating: [S]

A great short story with a clear and important message.

[Daniel Hageman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Such a salient story to highlight the moral imperative of anti-aging research.

[Knick Knack Kitty Kat · Rating 4 out of 5]

Loved this!

CGP Grey has an excellent video wrt same story

[Lannie · Rating 1 out of 5]

Look, death is bad and maybe we should enact research policies to figure out how to stop it.

I saved you a lot of time here without pretending to write a children's tale.

These things annoy me in a special way. "These things"? Yeah, these things. Stuff that is created by adults, for adults, but pretends to be for kids either because the craft required to talk about the subject is missing, or because the audience is perceived to be child-brained. This fable is a parody of itself. What if death were a dragon... tyrant!? Talking about death is too abstract, too unrelatable, but dragons who are tyrants? That should send the message.

I'm reminded of "Albi the Racist Dragon," except this plays it straight not realizing it's a punchline. It's so manufactured, so shallow, that the only thing it can do is convince people who already agree with it thay somehow it's a clever metaphor for something complex. It's not, though. This is for adults to read and pretend it makes the point really well if you show it to your kids, but it's so obvious and, importantly for a fable, so kinda boring as it winds its way to the point that you wouldn't really want to waste a kid's precious time reading it to them.

Otherwise it's pretty harmless lol. Techbro hopefuls will love this, clapping at the idea that technology can kill death but never TRULY wondering, "but kill death for whomst, and at what cost to whomst else?"

Not sure why I have to be so harsh on it, I just do! It annoys me like... like, okay, imagine a dragon-jester who is annoying...

[Dean · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating perspective on death and a compelling argument for the pursuit of immortality.

[· · Rating 1 out of 5]

(30 January, 2025)

As a short story, it's OK; as a fable, it sucks. Death and senescence are not the same thing, if the author keeps it at the latter, he’s on safe ground but we’re too shortsighted to adapt to a very, very long life (free of debilitating ailments of any kind) and everything it entails.

In his 'MORAL' commentary, Bostrom's

"Maybe people will have to learn to have children later and less frequently."

is a joke. We live in an unenlightened age, case in point: in December 2024, politicians from a southern province of India (the most populous country in the world) want people to have more kids just to keep their seats in parliament! And that's just one example among so many. We are wayyyy too stupid to navigate such a drastic increase in human lifespan.

As a species, we decry any kind of government interference in procreation, but we can't curtail it ourselves. We are presently at 8.2 billion people on our planet, when will we understand it has to slow down soon? At 10 billion? 20 billion? It’s entirely conceivable we won’t get it until it’s forced on us, as in mass unemployment, mass famine (er, more so than now), mass genocides (again, more than what we have now), mass suicides et cetera…

There already is a partial solution to one of those problems, famine, but not many of the world's richest half want to be vegetarians or vegans. Huh, really? Why ignore it?

All this plus our increasing impact on the climate...

[Muath Aziz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing, a new favorite next to Animal Farm (I wouldn’t third it with Little Prince because that’s in an even higher level of astonishment and dearness to my heart). Simple and deep, it is for all ages and cultures.

I came to know it from CGP Grey animation adaptation. I am a big fan of CGP Grey and his videos. The dramatic treatment to the fable in the video is very good and even more epic than the written story.

People adapt, because people forget. They forget, because they helpless, because they are bored.

=====

Here, as per the writer’s comment, the dragon is death and disease, and 1/7 of the budget is what actually USA government spends on Healthcare instead of spending it on improving medicine. I know that it is his story, but the dragon to me is a dragon, a very big one nonetheless. This story is not post-myth, it is myth.

=====

خنقتني العبرة وانا اشوف القصة، عند العامل وهو يطلب من الملك انه يوقف آخر قطار لأن أبوه فيه.. وحتى يوم قريت القصة المكتوبة انخنقت من الطفل وهو يقول التنين سيء وبرضوه مرة اخرى وهو كبير ويقول للملك وقّف آخر قطار

[Irene Lasàgna · Rating 3 out of 5]

Where does Bostrom suppose billions of near-immortal people will live? On other planets? Once we're 200-year-olds, we'd still moan "Why can't we live up to 400 years?"
Maybe I love death (I don't). Maybe I find the idea of immortality boring and terrifying at the same time. Lengthening our life spans is not the solution I envisioned. Everything dies, and that's where the beauty of experiences lies. Time flies and you won't be reincarnated (I think), so treasure every fleeting moment, every person in your life. You savour them better if you know they are, and will be, destined to end.

[Ostrava · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm not sure if I agree with its philosophy, but I find its point of view remarkably original and audacious. Though the writing could have been a little bit better, the actual idea behind the fable is more than passable and works well enough for the author's intentions.

Something was learned today!

[Gordan Karlic · Rating 3 out of 5]

CGP Grey brought me here.
I understand the point of the story, but not that impressed.
I thought dragon will kill them all.
Would rather point of the story is stupid human you cant cheat death, your hubris is your doom.

[Alexej Gerstmaier · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely excellent short story. READ THIS RIGHT NOW

[Nu · Rating 5 out of 5]

A surprisingly deep story about the value of human life, the “inevitability” of death, and the brilliance of human ingenuity.

The story describes “death” as this looming dragon with an insatiable appetite who demands to be fed with human sacrifices daily or mankind would face indiscriminate deadly consequences. Mankind, therefore, was forced to give up to the dragon a daily ever-growing number of their fellow people to satiate the dragon’s hunger and wrath. This was indeed seen as unfair throughout the land and many attacks on the dragon were launched, each time the humans were mercilessly defeated. Until the reality and inevitability of death, i.e., the dragon was accepted as “inevitable”.

However, it takes the vision of a few brave scientific people and the words of an innocent child who simply points out “the dragon was bad!” for the leaders to incline towards rejuvenating efforts to “doing something” to defeat this tyrannical dragon.

Human ingenuity was subsequently fully embraced and most importantly, funded. Sure, there were some casualties along the way, but ultimately the results would be for the benefit of all the humans. Particularly, delivering a deadly blow to the dragon and thereby ridding the world of “death” through the means of scientific innovation.

The premise or the significance of the “fable” was that death may not necessarily be a fact of life. Human beings ultimately have within them the ability to combine their brains and resources to engineer defeat of the insurmountable. Scientific advancements, if embraced and funded, could be developed to benefit all of mankind.

Ultimately, the humans defeated the dreaded dragon, and the story ends as the new beginning of the existence of mankind in the absence of the “dragon”.

This was quite a find story in its essence. But I couldn’t help the niggling at the back of my mind that this issue was truly oversimplified. Human nature, in my view, was not considered. We humans have within us the propensity for great evil and for great good. Which do we choose and how do we proceed?

For me, the question of the “after” or the “then what?” pops up a lot. Would this new way of life be better or worse than with the dragon? Would humans be as united in scientific advancement? Would there be common goals? What would such an existence mean to a human?

As I ponder these things, I hope you give it a read.

[Ishan Mukherjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This fable is held up as the reason for writing altruistically minded fiction: Vitalik Buterin, a billionaire, has it linked on his Twitter bio! Like Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, and The Sequences, it is inspiring how much The Fable is bothered with making the world a better place. The sequence about the man who says that death gives life meaning is one of the most emotionally forceful arguments I've read in fiction, or really anywhere. (The chapter on free will and the criminal justice system in Behave by Robert Sapolsky was another deeply impactful section for me in this regard.)

That said, I don't know how tractable anti-aging research is. There are good reasons to think it's not as tractable as slaying the dragon is in the fable: unlike reducing existential risk or slowing down climate change, averting aging isn't a public service, you can profit off of it. It seems unlikely to me that people who work on curing, say, cancer, haven't thought of tackling the problem of aging. While it is possible to argue that working on the moonshot problem of averting aging is worth it because the social value of this research could far outstrip the profits to the inventor of a cure (hence why not many people are working on it), curing aging is *highly* profitable -- you'd expect lots of people to be working on it even if it is only remotely tractable.

Nevertheless, this story is a nice reminder to care viscerally about improving the world.

Relatedly, I'm in awe of Nick Bostrom's memetic resume: anthropic bias, the vulnerable world hypothesis, the reversal test, astronomical waste, the unilateralist's curse. How does he come up with so many good ideas?

[Simon · Rating 5 out of 5]

A powerful and provocative story that challenges our complacency and resignation towards death. The author, Nick Bostrom, uses a metaphor of a monstrous dragon that demands a daily tribute of human lives to represent the ageing process and its inevitable outcome. He shows how humans have rationalized and accepted this cruel fate for centuries, despite its immense suffering and injustice. He also shows how some brave and visionary people have dared to question this status quo and seek a way to defeat the dragon, using science and technology.

As an effective altruist, I find this story very inspiring and relevant. It illustrates how we can apply our reason and compassion to tackle the biggest problems facing humanity. It also challenges us to question our moral intuitions and biases that may prevent us from seeing the true value of saving lives and extending healthspan. It invites us to imagine a world where death is no longer inevitable, but optional.

I think this story is not only a philosophical parable, but also a call to action. It urges us to support the research and development of anti-ageing therapies that could potentially save millions of lives every year. It also encourages us to advocate for a cultural shift that recognizes ageing as a disease that can potentially be cured, rather than a natural part of life that must be endured. It reminds us that we have the power and responsibility to shape our own destiny, rather than submit to fate.

I highly recommend this story to anyone who cares about reducing suffering and maximizing well-being in the world. It is not only an engaging and thought-provoking read, but also a catalyst for change.

[Stone · Rating 4 out of 5]

What is death? If we consider death to be some insurmountable, ordained becomings, then so were open oceans for the seafaring Phoenicians and smallpox for residents of pestilential medieval Europe. Of course we could utilize all our present knowledges to make its presence look 100% logical and its absence scientifically unachievable and morally undesirable. After all, the humanity was fully confident that high infant mortality and low life expectancy were normals, and was convinced in 1900 that Newtonian physics was the explanation of everything and all that left was some marginal refinements. The moral of this fable, already succinctly summarized on the website, has its relevance to anything we deem "impossible" at the moment -- intergalactic exploration, controlled nuclear fission, mind-synchronization networks, long-range wireless energy transfer, etc. There is no reason not to put confidence in the breakthrough of the aging problem. Though there was a certain degree of inconsistency in the analogy, the parallel was far more obvious. It was a really thought-provoking short story that well worths your 10 minutes.

[Clint · Rating 5 out of 5]

An important allegory concerning the topic of death, which prompts critical questions on how we, as a species, should approach the Tyrannical Dragon of death, and highlights the impact of neglecting to combat the pressing issue of senescence, or aging.

Humanity currently gives an inordinate amount of precedence, and priority to, shallow/limited attacks on death, rather than dealing with the underlying issue of aging that claims so many lives to the point we seem to become numb or blind to the sense of its scale. In the fable, the king is often addressing and consuming a lot of resources addressing less important threats like rattlesnakes and tigers, instead of organizing an effort to annihilate the Dragon. This strikes a parallel with how governmental administrations dedicate a disproportionate amount on disease treatment and minimizing the impacts thereof, and so little to aging.


There are more morals to be gleaned, and I encourage anyone to read it.

[Oli Omphalos · Rating 5 out of 5]

The idea that struck me most is not just how illogically resigned we are to death, but that it is our moral duty, in fact our ethical prerogative, to work towards the abolishing of senescence and the extension of human health-span. The fact that we are focused on "aging gracefully" (i. e. be resigned to our fate) can be just as pernicious as being actively complicit in mass murder. Although, individually, most of us don't think of our own mortality and just shove it away in the back drawers of our mind, we tend to view people who fight tooth and nail against aging and death with a mix of pity and condescension. The common "wisdom" goes: once you've reached a certain age, you should stop fighting and try to appear as graceful and dignified about it as much as you can. Any science that tries to slow the process of aging or, heaven forbid, stave off death is often met with suspicion of not derision.

It doesn't have to be that way. It shouldn't be that way.

[JimDavisFan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Techbros are servants of the dragon convinced they are underdog heroes.

I loathe how these dipshits seem to control every aspect from our lives nowadays. We are basically their cattle, yet for whatever reason everyone seems ok with that.

We were promised a lot of great things for the future. What we got instead was enviromental destruction, increasing inquality, a global pandemic, and shit like nfts and ai "art".

Imagine if people like Elon Musk were immortal and we had to suffer them for the rest of eternity. He probably would declare himself god emperor of Mars or similar nonsense while us peasants are forced to fight for food in our agonizing planet.

Technology by itself won't save mankind. Hell, it won't even make a better world if a greedy 1% keeps controlling everything.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

First this is an essay, and not a book, so having it on Goodreads seems sort of inappropriate. However, in trying to make sure I'd read all by Nick Bostrom, I'll click this off as well.

The parable is clear, concise and a specific point about how overall citizen and government priorities and views on healthcare are fundamentally misguided. Fighting cancer, diabetes, and all the other diseases in a long list misses the point - these are usually caused to a greater or lesser extent by the aging process, thus trying to cure the symptom isn't nearly as rational as curing the underlying cause - which few dollars and brains are currently allocated to. Its a solid and hard to argue point.

[Tomasz Stachowiak · Rating 3 out of 5]

The whole metaphor is too on-the-nose and falls apart after 3 paragraphs. Then it just drags on. There are too many repetitions and crude comparisons to enjoy it as a fable. It's an article poorly disguised as a fable (not even at the level of Slate Star/Astral Codex), and the dragon layer simply doesn't help to get the point across nor does it make the paper more enjoyable.

To make it worse, there's an explicit moral AND a list of lessons at the end. You could just read that and get 100% of the contents. Still 3 stars, because the topic is important, and the arguments valid.

[J_BlueFlower · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting story and a very good way to make the reader think. I read it shortly after finishing Thus Spoke Zarathustra and the ideas fit very nicely together. Nietzsche would call the scientist and the King a bridge to the superhuman - the human that shapes his own life exactly as he wants it.

[Nuno · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting fable from the philosopher Nick Bostrom, equating a dragon to human aging and senescence.
The fable is really simple, the thought provoking part is the moral imperative Bostrom believes it exists to urgently foster research to maximize the "health-span" of humans, thus saving millions of people from unnecessary suffering, lost of faculties and maybe, death. The sooner we start, the more people can be saved from this "dragon".

[Yash Gadodia · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you go to the twitter of Vitalik Buterin you will find a link to this story which is how I found out about it (https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin)

It's a really interesting story, one that is worth reading and re-reading. I haven't fully digested it myself but yeah I'm going to reread it and update this review when I'm done.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Don't sleep on the GR algorithm! It's so good at recommending hidden gems like “The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant” based on my tastes.

It's only a few pages long, so I won't go into detail, but if you're interested in bioethics, it might be worth a read. :D

You can read it for free on the author's website.