Eh, but elves tend to love nature. that in itself would hinder their advancement, especially since their is no magic
If lifespan here is not meant to be the biological limit, which is very rarely achieved, then why do the other races have much higher average lifespan? They have less famine? Less vulnerable to disease?.
Remember that conflicts and war advanced our civilization by a huge margin. So in your statement Beastmen will naturally come on top if only they use their noggins.
Just FYI, since the creation of nuclear weapons, the US has lost 6 of them. Nobody knows how many Russia has lost, simply because they are Russia. So maybe there are more than a dozen nuclear missle or bomb just laying around in the wild, or carried by the wave to places unknown. Just think about that when you are about to sleep tonight
Yea, but beastmen tend to use physical strength not their noggins. So while they love violence their love of physical and ability for physical prevents them from advancing. Humans develop so much to make up for our lack. Why was the spear invented? To help kill things we couldn't. Why would a beastman need a spear when they have claws that can do the job perfectly fine?
I didn't bother adding maximum lifespan as it doesn't really clarify anything than some unnecessary confusions. Biological lifespans are of course a little higher than the average lifespan like how someone got up to age of 121 when the average global lifespan is 70-ish.
I'd also argue against that. Long lived would also make them look long term at things. Why? Because they live so long what you consider long term is actually short term to them. They plan something that takes 50 years to achieve. To us that is long term, but to them its short term as they can lives much longer So it's all perspective. Especially for humans. We have short lives and are generally short term oriented. It's why we advance so fast. we dont take the long term into account. It's a great thing for advancement but also the very thing that might wipe us out
It's a metaphor. I meant to say that if we are as powerful as dragon and live as long as them, we won't even have car or plane, or phone or internet. We would be sleeping in a cave with tons of food in our belly.
A person in power that want to maintain his power. If that person or organization want to keep their power, they will most likely to introduce status quo. The longer their lifespan, the more they will be afraid in losing power and status.
Lifespan is not a good indication of advancement when it comes to civilization, sadly. Civilization in its purest form is the battle against the 'wilderness', against nature. But on the flip side it is also a battle against ignorance. And a battle against itself. Civilizations require growth, either in economics, military might, or against nature itself. For mankind, it's always been against itself and nature. Need water for a growing city? Learn how to mine tunnels or build aqueducts. Need new metals to make decorations for the gods? Or for weapons against other groups or predatory beasts? Learn how to mine and smith. Need to comfortably settle more people within a limited space? Learn how to design and build larger, taller buildings. But civilizations are controlled by people, and people can become corrupt, lazy, or despondent. Lavish lifestyles where the learned and politically powerful gather tend to become focused inward, using up more resources while not producing or pushing forward. This causes stagnation in a civilization, which is often the leading cause to its downfall or destruction. Examples of this can be traced back to ancient Egypt, China, and even the rise and fall of the Roman Empire. On the other hand the free-flow of information and a higher base of education can and does offset stagnation. When more people have the ability to think about the world and come to understand its principles, then progression continues even if parts of the population withers. A good example would be what happened to ancient Egypt, where only the nobility and priesthood were able to learn to read and write. Egypt at that time had a standard of living that was far more cruel and desolate than many other civilizations, and didn't have a good middle ground/merchant class that could rise up. The government/state literally owned everything in a way that's hard to really understand these days. This caused a severe lack of talent throughout Egyptian history, limiting that civilizations maximum potential for growth and causing long periods of stagnation and regression interspaced with only brief periods of -relative- prosperity in the civilization as a whole. Yet the people of ancient Egypt very rarely benefited, due to the ego and doctrine of the rulers and the reigning religion of the time. It was more important for new temples, monuments, and tombs to be built than to enrich the country and civilization as a whole. But civilizations are built upon the needs of the people in question. Even today the money flows where their is a market for it, and this shapes how and in which directions civilizations prosper or fall. It doesn't matter if that civilization is of mankind or any other alien race. Thus as I said, lifespan is not a good indicator for the potential growth of a civilization.
Got to clarify that it is dragonoid not dragons. (Like the ones on TenSura, the human-looking ones to those scaled ones.)
on that note the question would be why would they need it desu ka? as long as there is no impeding crisis , motivation, or purpose long lived races wouldn't need to actually do anything grand desu then again the counter argument would be why not ..... so in the end I stand by my statement that "A civilization does not depend on the race that it has but by the NEEDS of the race of that civilization" desu
Needs do greatly affect, but so do the basic characteristics of the race. Fantasy elves for example are all about nature and working with it. The is on their very nature. Thus when they have problems they will solve them in ways that conform with nature. And thus in our view stifle their advancement after they reach a certain point unless if they can overcome to an extent their own nature.
Yeah, but lifespan has an overall huge impact to civilization development if you include the fact that they need to start from zero. You mostly mentioned civilization on middle stages. What about on earlier or advanced stages? (They do apply but not as impactful as when on middle stages like Egyptian Civilization to the current Era)
No way, even dragon needs to hunt, not unlike humans needed to hunt, and the resources is always going to be limited, no matter how powerful you are. The limited resources will introduces conflict, and in this case it will be against another dragon.
so in the end it boils down to the level of an external force that challenges such a long lived race desu~
Having shorter lives will mean that reforms will happen more often in society due to the 'oldguard' or 'conservatives' (those that oppose change) will die off faster. It also means that people will have more drive to accomplish things since they have a short lifespan (they only have so much time to achieve something). I don't really understand taking away the smithing specialty of dwarves, you should have said gnomes instead.
anyone saying humans is unaware of the climate then surrounding the possibility of advancement. we in this world had low intelligence predators. so we gathered and survived. such a climate wouldn't exist in an environment that allows existence of multiple civilization capable species