Would you like to have your rate of physical aging slowed by a factor of thirty so as to give you a life expectancy of about 2,000 years?
I guess that depends. Is this something that’s universal? I mean, does everyone’s aging slow down or is it just me? If it’s just me, then I don’t want to do it. I can’t imagine how heartbreaking it would be to outlive so many generations of friends and family. I imagine that being nearly immortal would grow very lonely after those first hundred years if you’re the only one who isn’t aging.
I’ve got all these thoughts and variables for how this could or could not work. I think it would make a good story. Maybe I’ll work on that…
Would you want that kind of extended life expectancy?
*The Question of the Week can be found in The Book of Questions by Gregory Stock, Ph.D.
The Confusing Middle 
What a thought provoking post!
My mother turned 99 in February. Long enough to see all her close friends die, usually years before. She has always been exceedingly stoic, so it’s hard to say how deep was her loneliness before the dementia set in four or so years ago, but from clues I know she was feeling more than enough loneliness.
I’m like you: I don’t want to outlive my friends and siblings.
The other thought I had about the post was this: You know how difficult it is for people to change, embrace new ideas and improvements as they get older. If all of us lived 2,000 years, wouldn’t we be living by and large in stagnant, ossified societies headed up by the oldest among us, and probably quite oppressive. Imagine a 2,000 year old Stalin as a leader!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s an excellent point regarding a person’s general fear of change.
LikeLike