Then you’re missing the point. Your body and your legal and social status would be that of a 5 year old (and that would fix itself with time). Your mind would still be as it is now. With dementia, it’s the other way around.
Well yeah. The point is that it’s a somewhat tougher choice, given the less-sweet scenario of being physically and legally a 5 year old in 2020 rather than 1965 (for you) or 1959 (for me).
On the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog… er, a five year old magically de-aged with an adult mind. It’d be pretty easy to find stimulating conversation and interaction at least at the written level.
One good thing about the 5 year old in the present option. You basically have double the time to learn things. If you were in the past, the information out there is just what you learned before. In the present you have the base of your old information and you’ll have time to learn new things.
Most of what you will be taught in elementary school to high school is what you know already, with a few additions. Instead of spending time learning that stuff, you can learn the stuff that didn’t exist when you were 5 before. Most of it is freely available. You might even be able to take some online classes.
The new PhDs I hired when I was 60 knew a lot of stuff I never had time to learn, though I knew the basics better than they did because I learned stuff when things were simpler. I often wished I could take five years to go back to grad school. This scenario is even better.
It sounds like what my childhood was like. This time, I’d know why I was having these problems, and probably have a much better chance at succeeding at what I failed at the first time around.
And having an adult’s understanding of what was actually happening, while having a child’s place in the world - it would be really interesting to watch the interactions of the children around me with that perspective.
And I would have the ability to get into the good eating, exercise, and spending habits early when I had an adult understanding of the consequences with a child’s starting costs.
The only downside would be where I started as a child - parents? Orphaned? Refugee?
This is one of the most one-sided “dilemmas” I’ve come across on this forum…
Greatly extend me and my parents’ lifespan, get to experience peak health and fitness again, get to pick a whole new academic and career path + lifestyle with a great deal of foreknowledge, or…
Cut my life short and spend it in probable discomfort and ill health. In fact, a scenario I could already create today by just exposing myself to high doses of radiation or certain poisons.
(on edit: I see the OP said “relative comfort”. So OK, take the ill health out and it’s just a matter of cutting my life short).
So a great option, that I would pay all the money I have in the world for, vs something much worse than the status quo…let me think…
Yeah, the strange second choice and the immediate death third option is an odd part of this hypothetical, and makes the first option practically necessary even if you think you wouldn’t like it. Grrr!, I hope you won’t mind, but I will note that I think the intention might be better fulfilled with one something like this:
-You get de-aged to 5 years old, but retain your memories and your mental state, including sexual and emotional desires and needs.
-The family that raised you gets de-aged (and perhaps resurrected, if necessary) to the age they were when you were 5; they are fundamentally the same people, but adjusted so they can function normally in today’s world.
-Any existing family you have continues to exist; your absence specifically does not traumatize or otherwise cause excessive unhappiness for them, and they remember you more vaguely. Any financial or other support you gave them is magically replaced in some inconspicuous manner.
After reading some of your clarifications, these are the stipulations I imagined. To that end, I would jump at the chance. I have had a rather unexceptional life, and even without ‘cheat’ levels of knowing the future, I would love a second chance at it, with enough knowledge to avoid the mistakes I made (I’m sure I’ll make all-new ones, but at least I’ll avoid the ones I already made). I would imagine someone who already has a great life might be less inclined to do it, though.
In some ways, (taking out the absurd advantage gained by foreknowledge of specific events that would make me incredibly rich) I would prefer to stay in the present than go back to the time of my original childhood, because I prefer all the improvements in the world that have happened since I was a child.
This kind of hypothetical is actually pretty common on the Dope.
But it’s normally framed in a way to make the youth option less palatable, usually by putting some emphasis on needing to relive past failures, or lacking freedom in some other way.
And I think you’re right, Mnemnosyne, that with a more balanced dilemma, the choice will often be based on how satisfied a person is with their life now.
For me, I’m a 40 year old underachiever. Give me the start over button.
Like Zyada, it doesn’t sound much worse than my actual childhood was. Oh, and maybe my newly youthful parents will believe in medicating ADHD this time around before I’m 18, so school might go better.
As long as I can assume my parents will produce my brother in 2021, I don’t really see any downsides to this choice either. I don’t have kids to disappear, my parents might live longer in the future given it’s entirely plausible the things they died from will be cured in 30-40 years, and a do-over at child and young adulthood would be sweet.