There is no courage in choosing death. If people could live forever, and some people suddenly started choosing death at 80, that wouldn't be seen as "courageous" but just plain weird.
> Have you ever seen an urban slum, or an overpopulated rural area?
Historically, higher populations do result in faster progress. This is pretty much fact.
> dont you think that this wouldnot deprive many from most of the meaningful aspects of their lives?
It would be a choice - live forever or have kids. Many people would find life much more meaningful choosing the former.
> What if longevity causes social changes which are difficult or impossible to reverse?
The slow deaths of billions of people, entire generations, is not an acceptable cost for faster progress.
It is absurd to justify the cost of progress with death. If people lived for 10k+ years in a static society, you would be called a monster if you implied that they should be dying slowly and painfully at 80 so some aspects of their society evolve faster.
> The generational conflicts may be very high in the ageless society you envision.
Again, this is not worth the deaths of literally BILLIONS of people! It is mad scientist talk to say that death on such a massive scale is acceptable for any cost.
