You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Metus comments on Open thread, September 9-15, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Metus 09 September 2013 04:50AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (126)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Metus 10 September 2013 02:00:57AM 0 points [-]

Not Jocks versus Nerds specifically, but biologically triggered strategies of high risk high reward until you are X years old, and who cares after that, you had your reward already anyway.

There is some evidence that organism evolve their livespan to roughly the time they would exist anyway.[Citation needed] An impressive example were two extremely closely related species of rodent, one living on an island with no predators and the other with a high density of predators. The latter lives significantly shorter than the former under identical conditions. So this idea seems not too far fetched.

Then again, for humans I would assume that any such strategy choice is either determined continually by external factors or determined by early childhood experiences or even epigenetic factors, as humans are highly similar but exhibit a diverse range of behaviors in different situations. This is all assuming your distinction is meaningful.

Now I'm kind of spinning round and round, and wondering if I survived event X for which I was designed, and now I'm left as the universe is in the joke. Purpose fulfilled. Yet, I live on.

Sounds like a textbook quarter-life crisis.