crankalicious profile image 85

If you could live to 200, 2000, or 20,000 years old, which would you pick?


You can also answer that you don't want to live any longer than you're going to, if you want. You do get to live all those years at whatever age you are currently, so you don't have to get so old you can't move or anything. Whatever answer you give, provide a short explanation as to why you picked it.

sort by best latest

C.V.Rajan profile image69

Disillusioned (C.V.Rajan) says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
lburmaster profile image80

lburmaster says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
TIMETRAVELER2 profile image93

TIMETRAVELER2 says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
sunilkunnoth2012 profile image74

Sunil Kumar Kunnoth (sunilkunnoth2012) says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
  • duffsmom profile image

    P. Thorpe Christiansen (duffsmom) 3 years ago

    I like your reasoning. 200 would be my choice too, providing I don't approach it as an incoherent vegetable.

crankalicious profile image85

crankalicious says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
  • Andy McGuire profile image

    Andy McGuire 3 years ago

    The question is flawed since there is no option for a normal lifespan, given that most people clearly do not want to live forever. It's like asking a vegetarian if they'd prefer to eat beef testicles, sheep brains, or a quarter pounder with cheese.

ParadigmEnacted profile image82

ParadigmEnacted says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
madmachio profile image61

Nathan K (madmachio) says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
lone77star profile image91

Rod Martin Jr (lone77star) says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
stclairjack profile image79

stclairjack says

3 years ago
 |  Comment
working