Aging as a feature doesn't make sense to me. It seems more likely to me that immortality simply hasn't been 'cracked' yet, intelligence that could create immortality would seem more likely to evolve first than immortality itself.
You have to get so many things just right for immortality to 'work', i.e. to actually be useful in a survival context. It does no good for creatures to not age if they lose a significant amount of viability.
But real immortality in the complete reversal of aging, I think would be an immense advantage. Instead of having to teach your young over a very short period of time the tricks they need to be viable adults, creatures could super-specialize. One creature could supply all the food needed for a huge colony. They'd just get better and better at exploiting their niche and other creatures could find other niches.
I think if intelligence hadn't 'gotten there first', immortal creatures would be running the show.
You have to get so many things just right for immortality to 'work', i.e. to actually be useful in a survival context. It does no good for creatures to not age if they lose a significant amount of viability.
But real immortality in the complete reversal of aging, I think would be an immense advantage. Instead of having to teach your young over a very short period of time the tricks they need to be viable adults, creatures could super-specialize. One creature could supply all the food needed for a huge colony. They'd just get better and better at exploiting their niche and other creatures could find other niches.
I think if intelligence hadn't 'gotten there first', immortal creatures would be running the show.