Page 1 of 3

Random Phylosophy/Psychology Ver. 2007

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:18 pm
by Foxchild
To revive an old set of topics that, long long ago, I once posted on a regular basis:

I propose this situation to you. While walking along, you encounter a being that proposes this ultimatum to you:

"Pick any age you wish to be, and I will grant you eternal life at that age. You will never grow older, and never die, by choosing any age at all. Alternatively, if you do NOT choose an age, you're life expectancy will be halved. Which do you choose?"

As with the posts of old, I'll save my response for a few days.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:23 pm
by _SeHT
I suppose it would depend which body I was wearing at the time. *chuckle*

In this human one? 27, I think,

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:59 pm
by Jerry Roosevelt
I'll pick 25.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:20 pm
by Rymn_the_Silver_Wolfe
with age comes wisdom, yet with youth comes strength.

The aged wish to be young and the young wish to be aged, but this is not always so.

were I to be faced with this decision I presume that I would hesitate only a while. realizing that the majority of youth look forward to being 21 and the majority of the aged look back at the days when they were 21, it would become clear to me that I could not choose to be 21.

doing so would make others uncomfortable. I would have what both sides long for.

it is with this reasoning that I would choose to be neither too far removed from 21 to look back in regret nor too young to be considered a child always looking forward to something that will never happen.

therefor, my answer would be 30.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:28 pm
by Comrade K
I'd also go with 30. Still young, but with experience. Now, I don't think you have to be physically older to gain wisdom, you merely need experience and a mature brain. But on the other hand, I'd need to know the definition of "never die". I'm not too keen on outliving everyone I know over and over again. And when the universe comes to an end? (It has to eventually) what then? No, if never really means NEVER, I'd rather die.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:10 pm
by _SeHT
Ahh, there speaks someone who has never died...

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:15 pm
by Muninn
I wouldn't pick any age and gladly have my life expectancy halved. Eternal life would be too painful, meaningless and boring in the long term. Just ask Heebas.

For the sake of giving an answer, I'd pick an age during childhood. You don't know what you've got until you lose it and when you're a child you've got it made. No worries about where to stay, what to eat, money problems etc. Your family takes care of all that.
Of course in this hypothetical situation you're immortal so your parents will get old, pass away and as a child you'll be raised afterwards by a relative or be put in a foster home. You'll have to experience them getting old and passing away too and after a while you'll gain a sort of numb uncaring attitude to death. Repeat cycle until the end of the universe I suppose.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:18 pm
by Tum0spoo
Do you get to know how much your life will be shortened by if you choose the latter option? say I was going to die at 50? It would be much harder a choice. But If I was going to live till 90 or so, I'd take the shortened life, because I do not want to live forever. No. That's a no brainer.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:48 pm
by Tavis
If it were a case of immortality, I think I'd do better with a shortened lifespan. But if I was assured a lifespan more like what I would have had, I'd probably like to be around 18. I think I was physically healthier then. :P

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:24 pm
by Tom Flapwell
I'd take eternal life if it was in heaven. Otherwise, I'd take the shortened life. I'm kinda prepared for that anyway.

I'm thinking my ideal age would be somewhere between 27 and 29. Not 30, because many people dread that number.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:28 pm
by Luke B.
I'm thinking 12 or so, maybe closer to 14/15 - young enough to escape the eyes of most authority, physically old enough to take care of myself. Plus, nobody suspects the little ones. D:

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:03 pm
by Angstwolf
I'd probably take the shortened life. I wouldn't want to live forever. I'm easily bored as it is, with a finite lifespan.

If I were to choose an age (right now), I'd probably say seven. If I were in a better mood, I'd say twenty-three or so.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:23 pm
by Kyler Thatch
I've read too many bad stories about people becoming immortal. I'd gladly choose to have my life expectancy halved.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:40 pm
by _SeHT
Why would you want to halve your life expectancy? Believe me: when one are dying the one thing one begs for is just one more day.

Besides which, unless one is phenomenally rich, there is little chance of accomplishing everything you want to do within the space of one normal lifespan, so in the space of half of it?... Less than half, because if your lifespan is 80 years, and you are 20 when you are posed the question, that gives you 20 more years - and if you are 30, it gives you 10.

Immortality is a curse and a blessing. And life is what you make it. If people you love die, they die and you grieve... but you heal. Eventually...

... Never be too quick to throw your life away. It is all you have, after all, that is inescapably and ineluctably yours.

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:46 pm
by nickspoon
I plan on dying at 27 anyway. Halve it!