3 ms·

I really don't understand your point either. Imagine Srinivasa Ramanujan living to be 500 years old rather than 32, or Leonardo Da Vinci still being alive today

• aaron-lebo 9y ago
  Most people aren't da Vinci and even if they were there's no guarantee (or likelihood) those artists could do that for any extended period of time. Picasso was Picasso because he was not da Vinci (well and a million other reasons, but just a comparison). Maybe da Vinci gets stuck in his views and doesn't have anything to offer as of 1900 except a shell of himself. Or, maybe da Vinci gets really bored after 300 years. What else does he have to prove? What I'm trying to say is that all progress has occurred within our now millenia old system of relatively short lifespans. It means that within 150 years, societies can completely change because new individuals and experiences have to take over. Even the ancients saw death as a kind of leveler. We all die, even the mighty don't get to take anything with them. Does that happen if we change that equation? Maybe it doesn't matter because people are good at adapting, but there's still a possibility it isn't all sunshine.