Discussion Title: What will life look like once humans achieve longer lifespans?

1. What will life look like once humans achieve longer lifespans?
1.1. There would be more aversion to dying.
1.1.1. Pro: People will want to keep living longer, and will have the capability to do so. Thus, they'll try to avoid dying as much as possible.
1.1.2. Pro: People may become more self-conscious about their looks, to prevent anything reminding them of dying.
1.1.2.1. Pro: Since living longer does not indicate more years with youthfulness, it is possible for people to appear older longer and thus more aware of their appearance.
1.1.3. Con: One's aversion is subjective depending on one's independent view of life and it's importance.
1.1.4. Con: People are already very averse to dying, to the point that it is unlikely that they would become any more averse.
1.1.4.1. Pro: Societies have created [mechanisms](https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/sense-time/201902/the-taboo-death), forms of cultural adaptation, that are meant to keep people from becoming conscious of their mortality.
1.1.4.1.1. Pro: [Death and dying](https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/sense-time/201902/the-taboo-death) are are already taboo topics, in particular in Western societies.
1.2. The world would be less livable.
1.2.1. Pro: People's' quality-of-life will decrease.
1.2.1.1. Pro: The quality of life on Earth will decrease due to overpopulation.
1.2.1.1.1. Pro: People would probably have less kids to not contribute to overpopulation. Their quality-of-life would decrease from this, as their life will less filled with experiences of having and being with their children.
1.2.1.1.1.1. Con: Childlessness has been [linked](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3159916/#S2title) with a higher level of well-being than having children.
1.2.1.1.1.2. Con: People may remain social in their older age, focusing their time on building quality friendships that support a healthy quality of life.
1.2.1.1.1.3. Con: Parenthood has a strong negative effect on a person's life and happiness.
1.2.1.1.1.3.1. Pro: On average, [the effect of a new baby on a person's life](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13524-015-0413-2) is worse than divorce, worse than unemployment and worse even than the death of a partner
1.2.1.1.1.4. Pro: When they grow old, they will not have children who will take care of them \(from the overpopulation risks\).
1.2.1.1.1.4.1. Con: Ageing parents can be admitted to senior homes which will take care of them.
1.2.1.1.1.4.1.1. Con: If people have longer lives, then there's only so long that they can stay there.
1.2.1.1.2. Pro: Governments would have to extensively spend on [healthcare](https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-xpm-2013-06-06-sc-health-0501-live-to-100-20130606-story.html) for the larger elderly population, leaving less resources for others and other areas.
1.2.1.1.3. Pro: The young population will be overburdened, which may negatively affect their well-being.
1.2.1.1.3.1. Pro: Once older people outnumber the working-age people, younger individuals will have to work for longer or compete with advancing technology to keep productivity higher to serve the proportionally larger elderly population.
1.2.1.1.3.1.1. Pro: According to [Census figures in the U.S.](https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-xpm-2013-06-06-sc-health-0501-live-to-100-20130606-story.html), there were almost five people of working age for each retiree in 2013, but when the lifespan is higher by 2050, the ratio will fall to almost three working-age people to one retiree.
1.2.1.1.4. Con: Overpopulation will be a temporary issue as humans come closer to living on other planets.
1.2.1.1.4.1. Pro: This is a realistic overpopulation prevention possibility, as Elon Musk already has [plans](https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-timeline-for-getting-to-mars-and-starting-a-colony) for a Martian colony.
1.2.1.1.5. Pro: People will have to live through that longer than now with their extended lifespans.
1.2.1.1.6. Con: The quality of life does not necessarily depend on the mere number of humans, but on whether their way of life is sustainable.
1.2.1.1.6.1. Pro: If life is unsustainable \(like people overconsume, among other unsustainable activities\), they take resources away from others around them, decreasing their quality-of-life in the process.
1.2.1.1.6.1.1. Pro: On top of this, only one person benefits, while the majority suffer. So if people are unsustainable, only a few would live luxuriously. But if people are sustainable, many people can live decent lives.
1.2.1.1.6.2. Con: Greater populations with longer lifespans eventually lead to sustainability with a higher quality-of-life, since a greater number of individuals can work longer on humanitarian solutions.
1.2.1.1.6.3. Pro: Researchers who achieve higher life expectancy will be able to spend more time finding solutions to the environmental, economic, and social problems of humanity.
1.2.1.1.7. Con: Longer lifespans alone is not enough to create overpopulation \(as if people live longer but have no kids, then the population growth is 0. If they die out, then any 'overpopulation' problem would subside eventually\). Instead, it's caused by other factors. So quality-of-life would not decrease from this if only lifespans change.
1.2.1.1.7.1. Pro: Overpopulation is usually caused by high reproductive rates. Low death rates exacerbate it by increasing the net population growth rate.
1.2.1.1.7.2. Pro: Aversion to dying may also contribute, yet not solely cause overpopulation, similar to longer lifespan effects on it.
1.2.1.1.8. Pro: If people have children, their children would have a lower quality-of-life than their parents, because of overpopulation's effects \(like overcrowding\).
1.2.1.2. Pro: People may become more isolated.
1.2.1.2.1. Pro: People tend to get visited by people later in life, but if people live longer with fewer health conditions, this is less likely to happen or be needed.
1.2.1.2.2. Pro: They will not need a social support as much to get tasks done, leading them to be socially isolated and feel the negative psychological effects \(like loneliness\) from that.
1.2.1.2.2.1. Pro: If people live longer, they may need less kids to replace themselves, especially early on in their life. This would equal less social support for them for longer parts of their life than now.
1.2.1.2.2.1.1. Con: If people do have kids, they'll enjoy them much longer with their extended lifespans too.
1.2.1.2.2.2. Pro: [Automation and AI](https://fortune.com/2019/01/10/automation-replace-jobs/) will increase and contribute to social isolation, where technology will replace the human support needed to carry out an older individual's' tasks.
1.2.1.2.2.2.1. Pro: As people live longer, they'll live through growing automation. So as the project goes on, they'll be able to get more help from it, which pushes people out, leading to isolation.
1.2.1.2.2.3. Con: Longer lifespans will allow people to spend more time with family and friends, as the can spread their working time over more years, resulting in fewer hours per day per task and the other parts of the day with people.
1.2.1.2.2.3.1. Pro: Since people won't be dying out in their lives, they'll be around more people for their whole life, allowing them to enjoy more of their lifetime with others.
1.2.1.2.2.4. Con: If people aren't receiving social support when getting tasks done, they'll seek it somewhere else. Either way, they won't be isolated.
1.2.1.2.3. Pro: People are going to more likely be working on long-term, larger projects \(personal or work\) with their longer lifespans, leading to isolation from it.
1.2.1.2.3.1. Pro: As people have longer lifespans, they'll likely lose their sense of purpose after getting what they needed to done in life. That'll lead them to work on [large-scale projects to fill in the void](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qcggatwPBk&feature=youtu.be&t=569), which would create isolation.
1.2.1.2.3.2. Pro: The longer people live, the more they have time to get into their projects \(especially longer ones\), so what they put off and don't prioritize, they now will. This will isolate them, as they'll de-prioritize socializing in favor of these projects.
1.2.1.2.3.2.1. Pro: If people live longer, then they'll have more time to work on long-term or [megaprojects](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/megaproject) that they'd typically put off with short lifespans. Delving into projects requires focus \(which involves isolation\), which would be for years instead of spending that time socializing with others.
1.2.1.2.3.2.1.1. Pro: People, during their last years, may want to spend time with others \(family, friends, people in general, etc.\) instead of projects \(as likely no one will know about them unless uncovered, so it's a waste\). If people live longer, they can work on a project for decades and still have time to spend with people afterwards.
1.2.1.2.3.2.1.2. Con: Even though it's socially isolating for the worker, the benefits do lead to more social interaction and mobility \(especially [successful instrastructural](https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/megaprojects-the-good-the-bad-and-the-better) ones and if it saves on budget\). So the social loss of one person is well compensated for the future generations they help.
1.2.1.2.3.2.2. Pro: If people live longer, they have more time to spend for traveling to their projects, leading them to travel to projects further out than they typically take. This would lead people to become more geographically isolated, which could lead to socially isolation
1.2.1.2.3.2.2.1. Pro: Projects are typically away from urban areas, so these long-distance projects will be even more so. People will have fewer opportunities to go to cities to interact with others than ever before.
1.2.1.2.3.2.3. Pro: The projects started by those with longer lifespans require fewer people for help, making them socially isolating activities, rather than ones for socialization.
1.2.1.2.3.2.3.1. Pro: Logistically, instead of many people working on a project for a short time, one person can work on one for a long time. Such placement will lead to more isolation.
1.2.1.2.3.2.4. Con: Since people are living longer, those who join a project will likely stay there more \(due to prioritizing it from living longer\), leading them to gain social networks on it. So the socializing will just transfer from what they typically have to those on the project.
1.2.1.2.3.2.5. Con: People may work slower at tasks, because they realize they'll have more time to get tasks done. So megaprojects may not be seen.
1.2.1.2.4. Pro: The population may start growing outwards, so people will be more geographically distant from each other.
1.2.1.2.4.1. Con: As the [population grows larger, they start moving to cities](http://theconversation.com/the-worlds-urban-population-is-growing-so-how-can-cities-plan-for-migrants-49931), so this is not much of an issue.
1.2.1.2.4.1.1. Con: Too many people living in cities, causes [vocal, local activists](https://www.useful-community-development.org/causes-of-urban-sprawl.html) \(like NIMBYs\) and [ignorance/selfishness](https://www.useful-community-development.org/causes-of-urban-sprawl.html) to push people outwards from cities to form geographically- and socially-isolating urban sprawl.
1.2.1.2.4.2. Pro: People will need to learn to exist on their own more, so they may have more skills and resourcefulness than now.
1.2.1.3. Pro: The longer a person lives, the more crimes they'll be able to commit \(especially if they already are prone to that\), which will make the lives of others more difficult.
1.2.2. Con: The socio - economic system would be redesigned.
1.2.2.1. Con: Such a scenario would probably result in global warfare with billions of geriatrics companies competing and trying to control the market, along with consumers trying to always find better \(which can create inequality\).
1.3. They may have [lower morbidity](https://youtu.be/OzNcoENNsxQ?t=238) levels.
1.3.1. Pro: 13% of centenarians do not get ill, even at 100. These are called 'escapers,' and a majority \(42%\) have delays in falling prey to illness. \([1](https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/centenarians)\).
1.3.2. Pro: People may engage in unhealthy behaviors without feeling as many consequences as when shorter lifespans existed.
1.3.2.1. Pro: People are unlikely to adopt healthy habits like eat clean or exercise regularly to extend their lives if they know they can live longer, even if they forgo them.
1.3.2.2. Con: If people can live longer, healthier choices may not be important since many people choose healthier options in an attempt to live longer.
1.3.2.2.1. Con: One can still live long and suffer the consequences of unhealthy choices such as chronic disease.
1.3.2.3. Con: They would have to suffer from the negative consequences of unhealthy behaviors for a longer period of time. This is an incentive to live as healthy as possible.
1.3.2.3.1. Con: It can be assumed that with the technology and medical care that extend the life expectancy of humans, almost every illness can be treated either. The consequences of unhealthy behavior would therefore be low.
1.3.3. Con: If a person has a debilitating condition that can't be healed, living longer means that people will live with morbidity for longer periods of time than now.
1.4. There will be more elders than children since humans achieve longer lifespans.
1.5. People will make important decisions later in life things like choosing a job, getting married, and having kids, as they have more time to plan them out.
1.6. Humans will become more like gods \(see traits [here](https://www.kialo.com/humans-will-get-closer-to-obtaining-godly-characteristics-like-immortality-eternal-youth-and-high-intellect-13288.25?path=13288.0~13288.24_13288.25)\).
1.6.1. Pro: Humans will get closer to obtaining godly characteristics like: [immortality](https://www.allabouthistory.org/greek-gods.htm), [eternal youth](https://www.realmofhistory.com/2018/07/02/ancient-celtic-gods-goddesses-facts/), and [high intellect](https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/10-awesome-attributes-of-god/).
1.6.1.1. Pro: The God-like attributes will allow humans to make even more technological and scientific advancements. Those might consolidate and even lead to greater amounts of these, or even new God-like powers.
1.6.1.1.1. Pro: One such new technology may allow humans to link each other and share their knowledge instantaneously. The gain in knowledge/wisdom would be immense.
1.6.1.1.2. Pro: Once people realize that one God-like power's achievable \(immortality, or close to it\) to be created by humans, then humans will look towards what else they can work on, leading to research of other God-like powers too \(with the benefit of the longer lifespans their given too, of course\).
1.6.2. Pro: This would rewrite history, as it's the opposite of [ancient Greece](https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/greek-mythology).
1.6.3. Con: The only similarity will be a longer lifespan, not the power and reign God's possessed.
1.7. People may be more educated, as they have more time to learn subjects.
1.7.1. Pro: They may be more tech-savvy, as new technologies may help people live longer.
1.7.2. Pro: This will help them be healthier, as they'll understand how to and live longer from it.
1.7.3. Con: Only those who love to learn will use this time to acquire more knowledge. Those who are uninterested would not become more educated.