Compared to most other creatures on earth, human beings spend a high proportion of their life in the aging process. Roughly speaking, we grow for 20 years, we reproduce/are fertile for another 20 years, and then we live another 40 years. Almost half of our lives are spent “getting old”.

And yet, getting old is something that seems to take many people by surprise. The concept of aging is curious and prompts a lot of questions. What is aging? How do we define it? What purpose does it serve? Why is such a large percentage of our life allocated to this process/stage? It may sound bleak, but why do we not simply die after we’ve reproduced like the vast majority of other life forms? In many respects, these questions tie into the larger question of life’s ultimate purpose, and the answers will be influenced by what value you place on life.

Part of the answer to this question lies in the fact that we are social creatures.

Darwin’s concept of Natural Selection (one of the central pillars of his Theory of Evolution) assumes that the primary driver of a species is its survival.

“…considering the infinite complexity of the relations of all organic beings to each other and to their conditions of existence, causing an infinite diversity in structure, constitution, and habits, to be advantageous to them, I think it would be a most extraordinary fact if no variation ever had occurred useful to each being’s own welfare, in the same way as so many variations have occurred useful to man. This principle of preservation, I have called, for the sake of brevity, Natural Selection.“

Darwin observed the “struggle for life” that all organisms endure, and he reasoned that adaptation (evolution) is a natural outcome of the desire to preserve life. The system of life we inhabit is made of many sub-systems, all of which influence each other, whether they know it or not. Whether psychological, biological, physical, or social, a change here affects something there. Pulling this lever causes that thing over there to move. Change is everywhere and it affects everything. As far as life is concerned, these systems are always in a state of flux, propelled by an overarching bias towards survival. The struggle is against death. We evolve as a species to survive.

Of course, it seems daft to think that the human race, for example, would actively (consciously) pursue a degradation to their longevity. It makes sense to make good choices (“natural selections” if you like) to prolong and enhance life. But is modern society primarily driven by a desire to survive? Does a wealthy culture struggle for life, or lifestyle? These are vastly different ambitions leading to vastly different ethical outcomes. The first values life in and of itself, the second values life only in as much as it is tolerable, comfortable and pleasurable. The former is more inclined to sacrifice self for others; the latter will sacrifice others for self.

What would Darwin say about modern society’s willingness to abandon the principle of preservation and cease the pursuit of survival when comfort was lost.