Poll: Would You Rather?

[Strazdas]

Immortal with pain. If im immortal, i learn to ignore pain. Pain is just impulses to our brain. In which case i get both.

I don't like the idea of immortality turning me to a paedophile... mortality sounds more like my cup of tea.

Better not read...almost any paranormal romance it seems.

Actually, that's another point. Who is to say that in 100 years the age of consent won't be 14 or something, and society expects you to be a paedophile?

Some things need to be cleared up: paedophile is people who want to have sex with pre-sexually-mature children. Sexual maturity happens in the age of 11-15 (earlier for girls than boys but they mix around) and exceptions happen rarely (there were sexualy mature 9 year olds and immature 18 year olds for example. So age of concent of 14 would not be paedophilic for the most part. It already exists in some countries too, though 16 is more popular.
While having concentual sex with, say, a 13 year old is illegal, this is merely "Sexual abuse of minor" and not paedophilia (the media seems to like that word because it sounds more scary). though the term of "SExual abuse" is quite funny considering it was concentual. but law assumes at that age all children are braindead and cannot be responsible for thier actions. Which does not always work but we have what we have.
Now another thing to consider is that human lifespan is increasing dramatically. our average age is going older all the time, and while so far biologically we did not notice a shift, in 100 years we may start to notice it. Since humans live longer we can afford to have sex later. This is partially starting to reflect in our law (for example here you will not get government support till 24 if you are work-less because government considers that even though you are legally your own person at 18, up to 24 your parents shoudl still carry you. our sexual schedule also took a turn now as most people start planning families in their 30s as opposed to 20s not so long ago. so human bodies may start adapting. There is no reason to assume the concent age goes down legally though. in fact there were talks about turning it 21, which i find stupid since im one of those people that think 18 is too high.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Some things need to be cleared up: paedophile is people who want to have sex with pre-sexually-mature children. Sexual maturity happens in the age of 11-15 (earlier for girls than boys but they mix around) and exceptions happen rarely (there were sexualy mature 9 year olds and immature 18 year olds for example. So age of concent of 14 would not be paedophilic for the most part. It already exists in some countries too, though 16 is more popular.

True, yes, I was using the word as it's generally, not accurately used.

Now another thing to consider is that human lifespan is increasing dramatically. our average age is going older all the time, and while so far biologically we did not notice a shift, in 100 years we may start to notice it. Since humans live longer we can afford to have sex later. This is partially starting to reflect in our law (for example here you will not get government support till 24 if you are work-less because government considers that even though you are legally your own person at 18, up to 24 your parents shoudl still carry you. our sexual schedule also took a turn now as most people start planning families in their 30s as opposed to 20s not so long ago. so human bodies may start adapting. There is no reason to assume the concent age goes down legally though. in fact there were talks about turning it 21, which i find stupid since im one of those people that think 18 is too high.

Er, why would that cause human bodies to start changing, especially in a mere 100 years?

 

[Strazdas]

Some things need to be cleared up: paedophile is people who want to have sex with pre-sexually-mature children. Sexual maturity happens in the age of 11-15 (earlier for girls than boys but they mix around) and exceptions happen rarely (there were sexualy mature 9 year olds and immature 18 year olds for example. So age of concent of 14 would not be paedophilic for the most part. It already exists in some countries too, though 16 is more popular.

True, yes, I was using the word as it's generally, not accurately used.

Now another thing to consider is that human lifespan is increasing dramatically. our average age is going older all the time, and while so far biologically we did not notice a shift, in 100 years we may start to notice it. Since humans live longer we can afford to have sex later. This is partially starting to reflect in our law (for example here you will not get government support till 24 if you are work-less because government considers that even though you are legally your own person at 18, up to 24 your parents shoudl still carry you. our sexual schedule also took a turn now as most people start planning families in their 30s as opposed to 20s not so long ago. so human bodies may start adapting. There is no reason to assume the concent age goes down legally though. in fact there were talks about turning it 21, which i find stupid since im one of those people that think 18 is too high.

Er, why would that cause human bodies to start changing, especially in a mere 100 years?

Because evolution favours usefulness. we can see some changes in our bodies in as little period of time as 500 years. if we plan family at 30 now, we may plan it at 40 in 100 years. as you know, at 40 the sucess rate of pregnancies drop significantly. so the babies that would be born are those who are from parents who have strong replroductive capabilities at this period of life. this means that slowly these genes would dominate due to lower sucess rate of reproduction in other people. this may cause shift in our sexual (biological) maturity that can have significant impact.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Because evolution favours usefulness. we can see some changes in our bodies in as little period of time as 500 years.

What changes are we seeing due to evolution in that time span?

Certainly, I could see humans evolving to have children noticeably later in life, but not in a mere hundred years.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Immortality.... You would be able to eat what you want and drink what you want with no fear of dieing of heart illnesses! You probably wouldn't need to sleep too! Then I would be able to sit on my arse all day playing my massive backlog of games that I have collected and not finished over the years, whilst working a security nightshift earning loads for little work... and whilst I am on the job I could work my way through the handheld games and TV/Movie back log I have too!

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Because evolution favours usefulness. we can see some changes in our bodies in as little period of time as 500 years.

What changes are we seeing due to evolution in that time span?

Certainly, I could see humans evolving to have children noticeably later in life, but not in a mere hundred years.

Gills.... We will obviously have gills by then. And everyone will be generally uglier.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Because evolution favours usefulness. we can see some changes in our bodies in as little period of time as 500 years.

What changes are we seeing due to evolution in that time span?

Certainly, I could see humans evolving to have children noticeably later in life, but not in a mere hundred years.

Gills.... We will obviously have gills by then. And everyone will be generally uglier.

Not so...the men will be ugly, but the women will fit modern beauty standards, only with different coloured skin and maybe pointy ears.

 

[KOMega]

I do like immortality.
Of course I have some questions on how this particular method of immortality works:
(aging, healing, illness, appearance,etc)

dunno bout the other option, but if I was ageless (rather than immortal but still ages) then I would feel a lot less pressure in living.
Living a mortal life can be quite the pressure sometimes.

 

[Chaud]

Since I think that Immortality is a curse, I only have the other option.

 

[AceTrilby]

So basically, would I rather be Renard from The World Is Not Enough, or Rin Asogi from Mnemosyne?

I guess I'd take being immortal but feeling pain, though both sound kind of undesirable. What if I was seriously hurt but didn't realise and died because I couldn't feel the crippling pain?

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

Depends on what you mean by immortality, never growing old or unable to die. Since you mentioned feeling pain I assume its the first one. If so, that's what I would pick. Never growing old would be awesome, but you want to be able to die. Not being able to die could be a "fate worse then death" if you get trapped somewhere or outlive a human extinction.

 

[Strazdas]

Because evolution favours usefulness. we can see some changes in our bodies in as little period of time as 500 years.

What changes are we seeing due to evolution in that time span?

Certainly, I could see humans evolving to have children noticeably later in life, but not in a mere hundred years.

Changes in chemicals release in the body naturally (sorry, i forgot the names). It is no secret that in medieval times men had higher physical strenght that was "enhanced" by higher release of chemicals (ocne agian forgot the name) that stimulated this. this is why they were much more acostumed to period weaponry, training notwithstanding. Another fact is height. Recently some studies has proven that men in medieval times were shorter in general by up to 30 CM than they are today. Sadly they found no period refernces for women so they could not compare them.
Now this is over period of 1000-500 years. So its not 100 and its not some massive change in how we work, but we never know what evolution will turn to. especially since we see much more toxins now that speed up genetic mutation in DNA sequences. You know there is reason the begining of human species are marked at the place that is known to have higher radiactive background from uranium under the earth. It sped up DNA mutations that eventually lead to favourable mutations.

Bravo, you have posted something a lot of those "img immorality is so sad" people need to read and realize.

 

[Not Matt]

think of all the good i could do for an eternity as immortal.

 

[Thaluikhain]

It is no secret that in medieval times men had higher physical strenght that was "enhanced" by higher release of chemicals (ocne agian forgot the name) that stimulated this. this is why they were much more acostumed to period weaponry, training notwithstanding. A

especially since we see much more toxins now that speed up genetic mutation in DNA sequences.

You know there is reason the begining of human species are marked at the place that is known to have higher radiactive background from uranium under the earth. It sped up DNA mutations that eventually lead to favourable mutations.

Citations needed for those three points.

Recently some studies has proven that men in medieval times were shorter in general by up to 30 CM than they are today. Sadly they found no period refernces for women so they could not compare them.

Er, they've known that for ages. You don't need references, you can look at skeletal remains (or for that matter, artifacts left behind).

However, that was due to diet, not evolution.

 

[Strazdas]

It is no secret that in medieval times men had higher physical strenght that was "enhanced" by higher release of chemicals (ocne agian forgot the name) that stimulated this. this is why they were much more acostumed to period weaponry, training notwithstanding. A

especially since we see much more toxins now that speed up genetic mutation in DNA sequences.

You know there is reason the begining of human species are marked at the place that is known to have higher radiactive background from uranium under the earth. It sped up DNA mutations that eventually lead to favourable mutations.

Citations needed for those three points.

Recently some studies has proven that men in medieval times were shorter in general by up to 30 CM than they are today. Sadly they found no period refernces for women so they could not compare them.

Er, they've known that for ages. You don't need references, you can look at skeletal remains (or for that matter, artifacts left behind).

However, that was due to diet, not evolution.

Fair enough, i really dont remember the sources by heart. And yes height is due to changes in diet, however changes in some things can lead to body changes was the point.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

Not feeling pain would actually be a sure fire way to die faster, because how would you know if something is wrong without pain being an indicator?

 

[Smeatza]

One is a superpower, the other is a cognitive disorder.
I'd rather be immortal and feel pain.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

Well, if by feeling no pain means that you are unable to feel anything, then I'm not for it.

There was an episode of House which addressed this very real, very rare condition and it was hell. Basically, the individual that was afflicted with this condition was not hindered by any pain since she had no feeling in her body, but it was soon determined to be a cruel existence. She would always get serious injuries-deep lacerations, broken bones, dislocated joints, burns, bruises, infected injuries-that she was unaware of and her body paid the price. She would also have to keep track of her bowel moments since she didn't get any sensation of when she needed to use the bathroom (I think she actually peed herself because she spent too long away from a restroom and lost track of time).

Sure for someone like Gregory House, who is in constant pain due to his leg injury that has left him crippled and must take large doses of Vicodin in order to get through the day, finding the secret to feeling no pain would be a godsend for him, but ultimately finds that it's a lot more trouble than it's worth (plus, he's a doctor; he can get all the drugs he wants).

So yeah, if immortality meant that I would age at a decelerated rate, ala Wolverine, that I would be up for that.

 

[Grach]

Inmortality is shit and not feeling pain is a real life disease. So no on both.