Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by razorunreal 3044 days ago
I think they've got the evolutionary argument backwards. Rather than the older generation aging and dying because there is some evolutionary reason why they should, I think there is simply not a strong enough reason why they shouldn't. Why fix the remaining aging bugs when you already live long enough to reproduce and pass on knowledge?
1 comments

Both arguments exist, although I don’t think the “ageing was actively evolved” argument has ever gained a lot of mainstream traction: it’s not very parsimonious (all the available evidence can also be explained by the simpler model).