The best economic, ethical, & effective-altruism arguments for Longevity (K.Pfleger)

From Karl Pfleger:

What are the best arguments for the aging/longevity field based on effective-altruism, ethics, economics, etc.? There are now enough particularly notable examples of these that it felt important to organize some of the most significant. Thus, I’ve compiled a small list at

Suggestions for additions welcomed, but note that the point isn’t to comprehensively list all such things, but rather to include a key core set of particularly notable ones that represent some of the best examples from each angle. [So for example, the old Longevity Dividend book is not included because (a) its economic analysis angle is now better represented by the much more recent Andrew Scott paper, and (b) it failed to be popular relative to most other books in the field & failed to have a convincing effect in terms of bringing resources into the field. This is in contrast for example to Ending Aging, which has enticed large numbers of people and a non-trivial amount of money into the field.]

Note that this new motivations table is distinct & complementary vs the objections table on the site, which has counter-arguments to the common objections to the field. The new table is focused on reasons why money/resources for the field is so important in the first place: the good stuff vs the counterarguments to the commonly-presumed bad side effects. The things in both tables ideally but particularly the content of the material in this motivations table is stuff everyone in society should know.

age1’s piece about economics of an aging drug would fit nicely on that list

Libraries for the Future | age1 | Substack

In the top section of the about page, called “why aging?” there are 3 sections: achievable, worthy, & lucrative. When I give talks, I tell the audience in one of the first slides that if there are only 4 things they remember the 4 most important things are the geroscienece hypothesis, and those 3 things: that modifying aging is achievable (it isn’t a fixed clock like it was common to imagine it being until recently), it’s a worthy cause (this is the effective altruism argument), and it’ll be lucrative for investors & entrepreneurs the way other revolutions have been (eg dot-com revolution, AI revolution).

The point of the list is the middle of these, the ‘worthy’ one. This age1 piece about how much money an aging drug will make is more in the lucrative category. It doesn’t really talk about how much good for humanity so much as how much good business.


1 Like