| > but I prefer evidence collected from modern people to justify those conclusions. No you don't. You want to reconfirm your bias.
(I assume by "Evidence" you mean something that lives up to scientific standards. If it doesn't, I have no idea what you are talking about). > It doesn't say anything about happiness, fulfillment, etc. Science almost never has anything to say about these (or anything else which is this subjective). > I seem to recall some crackpot theory that low-calorie diets (ie., borderline starvation) increase your lifespan. But that is very well supported by science (on mice and fruit flies; not on humans YET). If you were interested in evidence, you wouldn't call it "crackpot", especially not considering ... > does it sound like fun? How miserable are we willing to make ourselves for a few extra years in a nursing home? By this standard, you should be doing booze and drugs all day. I've heard they're really fun (and they cut off those long years of old age!) I really can't understand people whose thought process can emit things like: > That's probably a false dichotomy, but you get the point. "I can't find an example that supports my point. So I'm making one up that is probably wrong. That's totally legit, and we should continue the discussion assuming my made-up example is fact" |