Your choice: Big bucks in the bank now, or become 5 years old again?

Asked a neighbor and happily married American couple, both 64, to make a choice to a hypothetical question (to follow). They are in average health with no kids. They are retired with a $1,200 p/m pension. Both receive good S/S benefits. He has an enjoyable P/T job. They have an average mortgage on a $250,000 house in a nice neighborhood. They both lived quite happy average lives.

I asked each which they would choose: wake up tomorrow and you have $1.5 million, tax free, in your combined bank account, or wake up and you are five years old again, not knowing each other, living in an ‘average’ household, with a chance to see the 3rd millennium? [With the supposition you had as the 5 y/o no knowledge of the past or future, and your present spouse, if you chose, would be so in the future.]

Without hesitation, both took the money, with no question. (They didn’t ask me which I would pick, not that that matters).

If you were in their circumstances would you have taken the money, or the new life? And why not the other?

Is there a ‘correct’ answer?
The quandary has been bothering me. **Thanks for your help. **

No such thing as a “correct” answer, as every person will come at it with a unique perspective.

Gimme the money!

That’s 3 out of 3 for the money.

Let me keep my memories and I might go for being set back to 5 years old (although early teens would be better). Otherwise, I’d go for the money, because wiping out everything that makes me me, that has been added since my fifth year, is more or less the same as killing me.

If the new five-year-old has no knowledge of the past or future, he can hardly be said to be “you”, can he?

The money. Without my current knowledge there’s no reason to believe that my life would turn out any different, so what would be the point?

MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY!

Honestly, who wants to be five years old again?

What he said. All things considered I’d rather be rich than dead.

True. And there in is the debate. You would, in affect (or is that 'effect?) be giving up your old life, or YOU, to begin anew, to live through all there is to be into the 22nd century.

In my original question I used the phrase ‘3rd millennium’.
That’s wrong, unless medical science gets really good.
I meant 22 century.

Is neither a possible answer? I really don’t give a damn about money and would rather not be five years old again

Another vote for this position. In fact, this is why I’ve always considered reincarnation in general to be a rather pointless idea. Even if it was true, so what ?

As others have said, without memory retention, what’s the point of becoming the five year old? It’s completely indistinguishable from the situation where I die and some other five year old kid in the world experiences the third millenium. (The situation that’s gonna happen anyway).

Although, there are further questions along these lines, and I guess it’s not really so clear. If I were offered to have all my memories wiped and then myself plopped down in a new city with a really wonderful, happy existence, perfect wife, job, the works, just with false memories/a lack of my current memories, should I take it? That’s also indistinguishable from killing me and just pointing at some random other happy guy, but it does seem like an offer one might consider tempting, somehow, all the same.

I thought the same thing. The loss of my experiences and perspective is effectively death, from my current point of view.

If I could keep my memory, MAYBE I’d go back and be 5… but Jesus, it’d be boring to do grade school again when I’ve got the brain of a university graduate. I’d be hideously bored by kid’s toys and 5-year-old friends. Eventually I could be a super genius, world famous anything I wanted with all that knowledge of what’s to come, maybe I could become a pro athlete, almost anything I wanted… but the boredom might drive me crazy those first 5-10 years.

Nah, just gimme the money.

I’ll take the cash. If I retain any sense of self, I’d be dooming myself to some really bad times, and, if I lose my sense of self, all I’ve done has been for nothing.

Well, if there is no retention of memory or sense of self, I’d take the money, no question.

But even with the memories intact, it’s iffy. Seriously, how many of us could stand being five years old physically but possessing adult memories, thoughts, and temperaments. Even if you could redress the wrongs of childhood, a five year old child behaving like an adult would be a freakish oddity. There go your chances of a happy childhood.

Now, allow me to go back to the years when I was eight, eleven, thirteen, and seventeen and become a “guardian angel” to my younger self…that would kick ass.

Just like everyone else…if I could keep my memory, I’d go back. If not, I’ll take the money. $1.5 million isn’t really THAT much in today’s (and tomorrow’s) world. But being able to relive the last 30 years with the foreknowledge of all the pitfalls I’ve not managed to avoid this time through so I can avoid those and possibly end up with a WHOLE HECK OF A LOT MORE than $1.5 million? Give it to me any day.

Well, if you get to retain your memories, then you’ve already had your childhood. I think it would be possible for an adult intellect in a kid’s body to fake it enough to appear just slightly odd and boring. Out-smarting your peers when it came to stupid playground tricks and arguments would be kind of fun. Homework would be a breeze, so there would be plenty of time for play.

I’ve done five years old already. If I had $1.5 million I would (if necessary) pay it to not have to wake up 5 years old again and starting over again tomorrow.

With enough money, I can pay someone to treat me like I’m 5-years-old.

I had a good childhood, but I wouldn’t want to go through adolescence again for all the tea in China.

Off to IMHO to join any similar polls.

[ /Moderating ]