3 ms·
If you're going to be utilitarian - if people don't get to 70 they're losing years/decades of productive life. Those who die young don't contribute much. Whic
by TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
If you're going to be utilitarian - if people don't get to 70 they're losing years/decades of productive life.
Those who die young don't contribute much.
Which is also a fair thought experiment to explore.
And that's not getting into equally fair thoughts about morality and humanity.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoSure, but that is basically the question the OP was raising. >I wonder if a lower life expectancy isn't the worst thing in the world....Maybe we shouldn't be trying as hard as we are to drag on life into the late 80s and beyond. I think it is a reasonable and interesting question. If we could extend life to 200, but with the quality and cost of someone in their 80's, would that be socially desirable? Personally desirable? What if you have to work 10X harder or more hours between 20 and 65 to support an elderly population 10X larger.