I don’t think it works that way. Currently most human-on-human violence is committed by young people (specifically young men), who by this logic should have the lowest time preference, since they can expect to have the most years left to live.
So, depending on how much of this decrease in violence with age is biological and how much is memetic, stopping aging (assuming it would lead to a large drop in the birth rate) may increase or decrease the total violence in the long run (as the chronological age of the population increases but its biological age decreases).
It would also depend on how anti-aging works. Suppose that every stage of life is made longer. If young male violence is mostly biological, then some young men would be violent for a few more years.
Optimal age is also relative to what you want to do—different mental abilities peak at wildly different ages. If you stabilize your body at age 25 and then live to be 67 (edited—was 53), will your verbal ability increase as much as if you let yourself age to 67?
Athletic abilities don’t all peak at the same time, either. Strength doesn’t peak at the same time as strength-to-weight ratio. Would you rather be a weightlifter or a gymnast? I believe coordination peaks late—how do you feel about dressage?
Optimal age is also relative to what you want to do—different mental abilities peak at wildly different ages. If you stabilize your body at age 25 and then live to be 53, will your verbal ability increase as much as if you let yourself age to 67?
Staying physically 25 doesn’t mean you have to stop learning or physically developing. Surely the development of abilities in adult life is the result of exercising body and mind over the years, not part and parcel of senscence?
Surely the development of abilities in adult life is the result of exercising body and mind over the years, not part and parcel of senscence?
I don’t think we know. I have no idea why verbal ability would peak so late, so I don’t know whether brain changes associated with aging are part of the process.
Ending aging would almost certainly greatly diminish human-on-human violence, since increasing expected lifespans would lower time preference. Right?
I don’t think it works that way. Currently most human-on-human violence is committed by young people (specifically young men), who by this logic should have the lowest time preference, since they can expect to have the most years left to live.
So, depending on how much of this decrease in violence with age is biological and how much is memetic, stopping aging (assuming it would lead to a large drop in the birth rate) may increase or decrease the total violence in the long run (as the chronological age of the population increases but its biological age decreases).
It would also depend on how anti-aging works. Suppose that every stage of life is made longer. If young male violence is mostly biological, then some young men would be violent for a few more years.
Then again, if you had more to lose, maybe that would increase your incentive to protect yourself by getting the other guy before he gets you.
I would assume there’s a sorting effect—people would tend to figure out eventually that it’s better to live among low-violence people.
One big question is… ok, we want anti-aging, but what age do you aim for? 17 has some advantages, but how about 25? 35? 50?
I’ve read that cell death overtakes cell division at around 35, so perhaps a body in some longer-term equilibrium condition would look 35?
(I suspect that putting a single age on is too crude though. The optimal age for a set of lungs may not be the same as that for a liver)
Optimal age is also relative to what you want to do—different mental abilities peak at wildly different ages. If you stabilize your body at age 25 and then live to be 67 (edited—was 53), will your verbal ability increase as much as if you let yourself age to 67?
Athletic abilities don’t all peak at the same time, either. Strength doesn’t peak at the same time as strength-to-weight ratio. Would you rather be a weightlifter or a gymnast? I believe coordination peaks late—how do you feel about dressage?
Staying physically 25 doesn’t mean you have to stop learning or physically developing. Surely the development of abilities in adult life is the result of exercising body and mind over the years, not part and parcel of senscence?
I don’t think we know. I have no idea why verbal ability would peak so late, so I don’t know whether brain changes associated with aging are part of the process.