The first time I expressed a desire to live beyond 100, I was toying with the idea. I hadn’t made a decision to live beyond 100 because I considered it to be a combination of genetics, luck, and circumstances – not a decision.

When I met Tom, he had already chosen a path to longevity – even beyond 100 – and his determination and optimism about living an exceptionally long life were inspiring to me. He had created Live To Be 120 and Healthy.com a decade before our first meeting, and I was impressed by his unwavering belief in a way of life that I had only hoped for. I still had some doubts, however, that living to be a supercentenarian was wishful thinking.

When I discovered Ilchi Lee’s book I’ve Decided to Live 120 Years, the title shocked and then challenged me. His willingness to make such a declaration seemed bold and a bit reckless, even though I was living with a man who had made the same choice! Lee’s book re-enforced the power of making a decision, and eventually, I came around to understanding that wishing and hoping for something isn’t enough. Tom and I spent countless hours talking, considering the possibilities, planning our options together. His convictions – his certainties – became my convictions and certainties.

The decision to marry again and the vow to move forward in time with Tom took careful consideration, but once made, it became firmness of purpose. Our determination to do whatever is necessary to keep our love alive is the bedrock of our relationship. That means we act accordingly on a daily basis, but providing for our future together is paramount. The decision to live to 120 (and be healthy when we arrive there) is magnified by our unity.

Taking a visionary view of my human potential translates into a purposeful life. Among the major decisions of my life – to be a spouse, to be a mother, to be a teacher – the decision to embrace longevity provides a path for me to follow so that I may live as fully and as long as possible. I’ll always be grateful to Tom for opening my mind to the possibilities and then allowing me the time and support to choose a deeper purpose for the next decades of my life. Neither of us wants to settle for ‘aging gracefully.’

Ilchi Lee writes. “ . . . by planning to live to be 120, we become stakeholders in the future.” At a time when the world seems particularly difficult and alarming, it’s important for all of us to believe that we can contribute meaningfully to a better world culture, especially in the second half of our lives. However, the notion that ‘old age’ is a time to take it easy undermines the progress that will be essential for our human species to survive and improve.

A recent AARP Bulletin ran a sidebar titled, “U.S. Lags In Life Expectancy” in which the observation was made that, “The U.S. ranked last in life expectancy among developed nations through 2015, and is only one of 18 countries with an average life span that is less than 80 years.” The article went on to cite early drug-related deaths, stress-related deaths,  alcohol-related deaths, and increases in the suicide rate. Certainly the continuing obesity rate among Americans (above 30% in 29 states) should be added to this list as a factor in lower mortality rates.

Being estranged from their future selves is the culprit here. For people without a clear determination to live long, productive lives, the present takes over.

When given a choice between providing for future moments in our lives as opposed to providing for the present, we humans seem heavily predisposed to select the present rewards instead of the long-term. This ‘present bias’ is well-documented. Unlike the common definition of bias as related to prejudice, present bias is a collection of faulty ways of thinking. Among mental health professionals, there is a long list of cognitive biases (including present bias) such as the gambler’s fallacy that makes us believe, for example, that if a coin lands on heads five times in a row, it’s more likely to land on tails the sixth time. (In fact, the odds are still 50-50.)

A by-product of present bias is that many people avoid making decisions that could improve their future lives and chances for longevity in favor of some gratification (or habit) that anchors them in the present. This is probably true partly because we are presented with so many scary and distasteful images of what a person supposedly becomes after the commonly accepted age of retirement at 65.

Avoidance of one’s future self can be erased with a technology trick. It is now possible to see a projection photograph of yourself 20 years in the future. That, however, mainly addresses the physical self and not the ‘soul self.’ How can we encourage people to project their future selves in a meaningful way? How can we dispel the idea that it’s crazy to think of 100+ year-olds leading productive, creative lives rather than ‘wasting away’?

Living beyond 100 isn’t a miracle to be experienced by the very few. As Lee is fond of saying, “We have a responsibility to make our long lives a blessing for the planet and for the people we love, as well as for ourselves.”

Tom and I will continue to encourage others to get in touch with their future selves. The more we can expand our conscious awareness of what we can be in our later decades, the less we will tend to see ourselves as unknown strangers in some future time.