Why I do not fear death

[Secular Elation]

Many times, the subject of death appears in discussions at these boards. One aspect of death addressed in such discussions is our fear of death.

I have come to conclusion that there is nothing to fear of death. If it is in fact a return to nothingess, just as before birth, then there is nothing to fear--and I mean this literally, there is nothing to fear, since nothing is what awaits us after death. But I do not actually fear this nothingness. If absolutely nothing awaits us after death, what is there to fear? Can you remember the "experience" you had before birth? Of course not. There was no experience, no perception, anything. There was simply nothing. It was not a painful or frigtening experience before, how could it be afterward?

One will claim that we fear death because we fear losing good things--such as all the pleasures of life. In actuality, this may be true, but once we reach death, we won't feel anything in regards to this fact. Once dead, we won't be saying "Oh no! I am dead, now I will never again enjoy the pleasures of life!" The fact that one will not experience nor be aware of death after the fact renders such a fear irrelevant.

I am not saying that I can't wait to die, nor that I am enticing the arrival of death. Of course not. I am only saying, upon pondering my own inevitable demise, I have no feelings of fear or fright that most people feel when pondering their own mortality.

It is also true that fear of death serves a good naturalistic purpose: a motivation to keep us living. It compliments evolution, because organisms that fear death and do everything they can to avoid it are the ones that will live longer and continue to propagate. On that basis, I don't think an absolute loss of fear of death is a good thing. However, from the individual's perspective, at least from mine, there really is nothing to fear about death.

My two cents.

[Stormy]

I do not fear death, but my lack of fear did not come from thought, as you acquired yours.

I have came close to death three times, and each time... fear evaporated. Death appeared as nothing more than leaving my body behind and walking free.

I have every reason to believe that when I actually do die, my death experience will be the same... except then I will see more.

[Robert Anthony]

Death does not concern us, because as long as we exist, death is not here. And when it does come, we no longer exist.

[LittleGuy]

I believe the "real" fear of death stems from our fear of pain. It's just a consequence of evolution that leads to us avoiding things which can cause our deaths.

Your instinct can't possibly comprehend what it is to not exist. Only your faculties of reason can, but they don't deal with emotions such as fear.
Consequently, when you come to the conclusion that death is nothing to be feared, it is meaningless to that part of your brain that responds to only to basic stimuli.

Someone pointing a gun at you, someone holding a knife to your throat, someone about to push you off a tall building...

Those things are simple enough for your instinct to comprehend and therefore your brain releases the combination of chemicals that make you feel what is commonly called fear.

SE, wouldn't you- like the majority of normal people-, feel fear in these circumstances?

[Secular Elation]

SE, wouldn't you- like the majority of normal people-, feel fear in these circumstances?

Definitely I would. I did not intend to say that I would be fearless of all potentially life-threatening situations like the ones you describe. Just that death in itself doesn't cause much fear for me.

[SimplyAtheistic]

"I do not fear death, I fear the shitload of pain before death."
Jake

[spacer1]

"I do not fear death, I fear the shitload of pain before death."
Do you mean life? :D

[monkey mind]

I fear the death of others

[xorbie]

People who say they do not fear death are either dead or lying. What is meant often is "I do not fear the fact that I will be dead." This is fair enough, but I have no doubt that if I pulled a gun on you, you would certainly have fear. We fear death just like we fear pain, it is the same thing. We do our best to avoid death. There is a reason for this.

Now, it is admirable that you have accepted your death, but this is not to be confused with lack of fear. I too accept the fact that one day I will be no more, but thsi does not mean I don't actively avoid death.

***
xorbie aka The Wise Grasshopper

[wiploc]

Originally posted by xorbie
People who say they do not fear death are either dead or lying. What is meant often is "I do not fear the fact that I will be dead."

But that is what we mean, so we are not lying. I can certainly be frightened about being killed, but I am not afraid of being dead. I don't worry about before I was alive, so there is no reason to worry about after I am alive.

As somebody (Robert Frost?) wrote, "The universe may be as great as they say, but it wouldn't be missed if it didn't exist."

crc

[Secular Elation]

What wiploc said.

Of course if you pull a gun on me, I am going to pee my pants. The distinction is that death in itself doesn't frighten me. Being in fatal situation in which I would experience dying does frighten me, such as pointing a gun at me. I should have noted that while I don't fear death, I do fear dying. There is a difference.

I too accept the fact that one day I will be no more, but thsi does not mean I don't actively avoid death.

What makes you think I don't actively avoid death? Just because I don't fear death doesn't mean I don't actively avoid it. Did you read my entire post?

[Spurious Quirk]

Thank you SE -- have you read Lucretius' "On the Nature of the Universe"?

Anyway, I will admit that I am unwilling to cease existing, and the thought of not existing inspires discomfort indistinguishable from fear. I would really like to see what happens in the distant future, and I just like existing (in and of itself). I am made regretful and afraid by the fact that my existence will end.

But of course I console myself that it is an inevitability, and thus that fear is needlessly painful. Spending one's life cowering over the fact of it's short duration seems like a terrible waste.

So I try to ignore the fear of ceasing to exist, and instead focus on what I want to spend my life on -- what might make my life meaningful. If I can do something worthy with my time existing, that seems to sooth the anguish over the fact of death. Though, then one gains the fear of dying before one has completed your life's work.....

Ah well.

Cheers

[Secular Elation]

Thank you SE -- have you read Lucretius' "On the Nature of the Universe"?

No, but I will give it a look since you mention it.

Anyway, I will admit that I am unwilling to cease existing, and the thought of not existing inspires discomfort indistinguishable from fear. I would really like to see what happens in the distant future, and I just like existing (in and of itself). I am made regretful and afraid by the fact that my existence will end.

That's perfectly normal and natural. It makes perfect sense to have those feelings. The thing is, are you going to allow yourself to spend time worrying about something you can't avoid, instead of enjoying your life while you have it?


But of course I console myself that it is an inevitability, and thus that fear is needlessly painful. Spending one's life cowering over the fact of it's short duration seems like a terrible waste.

Indeed, and so I don't. The things I descriped in the original post allow me to not have to deal with such things.

So I try to ignore the fear of ceasing to exist, and instead focus on what I want to spend my life on -- what might make my life meaningful. If I can do something worthy with my time existing, that seems to sooth the anguish over the fact of death. Though, then one gains the fear of dying before one has completed your life's work.....

Indeed. And I do fear dying before I have completed my life's work, whatever that will be. But when it comes, so be it. I'm not afraid.

[Spurious Quirk]

Originally posted by Secular Elation
No, but I will give it a look since you mention it.

In many ways Lucretius is at the root of atheism and materialist ideology through the ages. He is also a great poet (depending on your translation). One can even make the case that his 'swerve' addition to the atomic theory anticipated quantum mechanics in that it incorporated utter randomness into an essentially deterministic universe. Anyway, he's cool....check him out.

As for fearing death, I do not believe it is ever possible to ever entirely get rid of the fear that non-existence evokes. Thus far I have become satisfied with imprisoning it in a tiny, oft-ignored corner of my mind; and replacing it with the fear of non-performance (in terms of not finishing my life's work...not the other kind :) ). At one point I also tried the mantra of "I do not actually fear death, I do not actually fear death..." but I prefer to be honest with myself as much as possible (also it doesn't realy work in the long term).

Cheers

[Nowhere357]

Originally posted by Secular Elation
I should have noted that while I don't fear death, I do fear dying. There is a difference.

This exactly captures my position. The amount of pain a creature is able to experience is disturbing.

Disturbing.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Secular Elation ... If it is in fact a return to nothingness, just as before birth, ... since nothing is what awaits us after death. ... Can you remember the "experience" you had before birth? Of course not. There was no experience ... There was simply nothing. ... how could it be afterward? Hi SE,

I think, that the only true and absolute knowledge I have is, that I am aware of something that is my self. All other ideas are worthless speculations. I think, one can learn a lot from the physical nature and its laws. For example there is no contradiction in the laws of nature and no animals, which can be created out of a hat nor any energy or mass can be transferred to nothing(ness). AFAIK there is nobody who can identify a self in a scientific manner. One can identify physiological functions of organs and biochemical processes, but the self, which is aware on his own, has not found or could be explained adequate scientifically. And AFAIK nobody knows, why he is born, and what is the exact purpose for an individual fate knowing nothing about the 'where from' and 'where to'. Fact is, that we were born; no one has born himself. If you argue, that you are coming from nothingness, you are now not nothing, but will be going to nothingness, then this has no parallel in the physical world; it would just be magic. And as long as you do not know for sure, what the purpose of this life is, I cannot agree with your speculations. I think there are two very different ways of living. The one way is to determine the own life and the purpose of this life. The other way is the learning from reality of life, without any determination, to understand the nature of the own self as truth. You can recognize, that your assumptions about you life prior and after life your fleshly body will be compost, are of no base, but of pure speculation, and you can recognize, that you are for true. No one other as you can be aware on this truth and reality. You can decide whether your claims to making speculations out of no base is more intelligent, or the acknowledgement of your self as is in its imperfection is more intelligent. Moreover, each of us have a recognizable special individual fate, for that most have no explanation. If a being is born, this is actually very different to other beings birth circumstances. And again, nature can show us (Newton), that causality is not corrupt. People do ask for this purpose of different circumstances and do lamenting a half of the life on it - father, religion, school or state. It seems, that this is a process of cognition in a 'dark' world 'seeing' or knowing nothing about our self. Why is that? Our death is for sure, and nothing can avoid this truth. People can agree on very same things they can perceive. Music, poetry, kindness, hate, terrorism, injustice or hypocrisy, etc. But I think it is no secret, that all this 'objects' are immaterial, and cannot therefore die; only mortal bio-physiological assemblies can die. Again you have the freedom of the decision to be exist as a bio-physical assembly, or an immaterial self, loaded with a physical body. I think that we can learn a lot from reality and from our self, not really something from the mainstream of educational morals and dead believing systems. As no theory can exchange the own sexual experiences, also no theory can explain the own experiences on immaterial 'objects' and their truth/untruth. From this it seems to me, that it may also helpful, to learn knowledge about the true self, as to assert speculative ideas.

Volker

[Millay1313]

I do not fear death. I believe in God and I sin, yet I do not fear death at all. I do not worry about it at all and rarely think about it until someone I know dies or when I end up reading about it on discussion forums.
:)

[Secular Elation]

I think, that the only true and absolute knowledge I have is, that I am aware of something that is my self. All other ideas are worthless speculations.

Such speculations are not worthless, because we infer them from reality.

AFAIK there is nobody who can identify a self in a scientific manner. One can identify physiological functions of organs and biochemical processes, but the self, which is aware on his own, has not found or could be explained adequate scientifically.

...not yet, at least. The future is always open to new findings.

And as long as you do not know for sure, what the purpose of this life is, I cannot agree with your speculations.

There is no purpose of life except for the purpose that each individual assigns to life. The "purpose of life" is entirely subjective to the individual, it cannot be determined objectively (IMO).

Second, what speculations do you disagree with, precisely?


You can recognize, that your assumptions about you life prior and after life your fleshly body will be compost, are of no base, but of pure speculation, and you can recognize, that you are for true.

Again, speculation based on reality. The reality is that I did not exist before my birth, and will no longer exist after my death. What is the flaw in such a statement?

[Secular Elation]

Nowhere357,

This exactly captures my position. The amount of pain a creature is able to experience is disturbing.

Indeed. In regards to the pain of dying, it does frigthen me. Hopefully if I ever experience a horrid death, an endorphin release will numb the sense of pain upon the moment of death. In fact, there was one missionary who lived in the mid-19th century, David Livingstone, who almost died after a lion attacked him. He lived, and wrote about his experience in Missionary Travels:

I heard a shout. Starting, and looking half round, I saw the lion just in the act of springing upon me. I was upon a little height, he caught my shoulder as he sprang, and we both came to the ground below together. Growling horribly close to my ear, he shook me as a terrier does a rat. The shock produced a stupor similar to that which seems to be felt by a mouse after the first shake of the cat. It caused a sort of dreaminess in which there was no sense of pain nor feeling of terror, though [I was] quite conscious of all that was happening...This peculair state is probably produced in all animals killed by the carnivora; and if so, is a merciful provision by our benevolent Creator for lessening the pain of death.

Besides the mention of god, it's a fascinating example of such a situation.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Secular Elation
Such speculations are not worthless, because we infer them from reality. ... Again, speculation based on reality. See. A duck in your town is a reality and a homosexual actor in your country is a reality. A homosexual duck called Donald Duck is based on this reality, but it is now a speculation of no reality. . ..not yet, at least. The future is always open to new findings. Why do you live in the present? No one can act in the future, because future is also a speculation and has no reality. This fallacy is also used by religions and by politicians. There is no purpose of life except for the purpose that each individual assigns to life. Do you know this from the future? Why do you live actually? Why do you must die? What is your knowledge (not speculation) on this? The "purpose of life" is entirely subjective to the individual, it cannot be determined objectively (IMO). I think I have written in this meaning. Second, what speculations do you disagree with, precisely? Your speculations on the nothingness of you. Please explain precisly why you are, and why you are can be nothing. The reality is that I did not exist before my birth, and will no longer exist after my death. I think it is OK if you are satisfied with that, but if you teach this to the world as a truth then you cannot wonder, why people kill then other without respecting an ethical causality of an effect in the next life to the individual soul. Do you wonder? Is there an ethical causality, that works?

Volker

[Jamie_L]

I do fear death. Not the state of being dead, but the loss of my life and existence. In some ways, it is a desire: I desire, more than anything else, to not cease to exist. It seems like it should not be a fear as well, but it is.

I fully understand the arguements of people who do not fear death. However, they carry little to no weight with me, because they do not get at the core of my fear and desire. I understand that I will not be around to mourn the loss of my existence, but that is irrelevant to the fact that I will not exist. And that is that state I do not want to come to pass.

I suppose the fear is the irrational response to the desire. However, I believe I have come accept the fact that I cannot dispell this fear, regardless of how much I comprehend and appreciate the arguements against it. I live with the fear and manage it. It's just part of my emotional make up.

I will say, however, that I think this fear is valid, and people who can't so blithely accept their demise shouldn't be looked down on as irrational or silly. Existence is all that we are. The concept of not being is quite daunting. Kudos to those who can deal with it so easily. But I sympathize deeply with those who can't.

Jamie

[Phanes]

Originally posted by Spurious Quirk
In many ways Lucretius is at the root of atheism and materialist ideology through the ages. He is also a great poet (depending on your translation). One can even make the case that his 'swerve' addition to the atomic theory anticipated quantum mechanics in that it incorporated utter randomness into an essentially deterministic universe.

The "swerve" in atomic theory was first postulated by Epicurus, afaik, as were a lot (most?) of Lucretius' other teachings. Including much of this discussion about death (e.g. Robert Anthony's quote).

Anyway, I've usually found arguments against fearing death pretty counterintuitive. Will I be alive to experience my death? Of course not. But I think that answer refers to a different, epistemological question. Just because I am not aware of how bad off I am, does not mean I am really not bad off.

Here's an analogy: Would you be averse to (afraid of?) suffering significant mental damage, such that it drops your intelligence to the level of severe retardation? What if I add the caveat that, in your new state, you won't even realize how poor your intelligence has become, precisely because it has become so poor? I know I would be afraid of that, if there was a plausible chance of it happening. It is not difficult to come up with other situations in which a bad state of affairs applies, but for one reason or another we do not (consciously) experience said state.

Here's a lousy attempt to put in argument form:

My current evaluation of death is as something strongly negative (I currently wish to avoid death).
It makes sense for me to currently be afraid of possible future states that I consider negative (depending on how negative).
Death is a possible (inevitable really) future state.
Hence it makes sense that I currently fear death.

The argument against fear, as most people have put it, seems to be that I won't fear or have a reason to fear death when I'm dead, because I'll be dead. Hence lines like "The fact that one will not experience nor be aware of death after the fact renders such a fear irrelevant." Obviously, it is true that I won't experience death when I'm dead. But that says nothing directly about the reasonableness of my aversion to it right now.

I think the real issue here is whether death has a negative status independent of how it is perceived by those who suffer from it (i.e. not at all). I think it does, inasmuch as we can evaluate it right now, as living people. If you think existing is better than not-existing, it seems to me you have to admit that you do think death is at least relatively bad. Whether you will still think so when you're dead is a sort of inadvertent red herring.

[John Page]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
No one can act in the future, because future is also a speculation....
Sorry, Volker, but this just cracked me up. It seems to me that in this statement you make an assertion that contradicts itself because it is a speculation about the future itself.

Anyhow, in a sense, we can act in the future. My reasoning is as follows. If a man can take actions today that will cause an effect at some time in the future, and that man knows these effects, he can be said to be acting in the future.

Of, and as for the OP, I can state that I do not want to die. I fear, however, that someday I will die and, perhaps worse, that someday I will want to die.

Cheers, John

[Secular Elation]

Just because I am not aware of how bad off I am, does not mean I am really not bad off.

But you are not aware of it, so whether it is in reality bad or not is irrelevant, because form your point of view you cannot determine it.

Here's an analogy: Would you be averse to (afraid of?) suffering significant mental damage, such that it drops your intelligence to the level of severe retardation? What if I add the caveat that, in your new state, you won't even realize how poor your intelligence has become, precisely because it has become so poor? I know I would be afraid of that, if there was a plausible chance of it happening. It is not difficult to come up with other situations in which a bad state of affairs applies, but for one reason or another we do not (consciously) experience said state.

A good point. Well, in response, I would have to say that, right now in my normal mental state, I do not wish to fall into severe retardation. However, if it did occur, and I do not even realize it, there there is no sense of pain or unhappiness over the fact while I am in that state.

This is the same view I have towards death. While I am alive I do not want to die, and I actively avoid it. However, since there can be no experience after death, I don't fear what happens after death.

One would likely retort: "Well, since you actively avoid death, you must be afraid of it, otherwise you have no motivation to do so." My aversion to death is not out of fear, but out of a desire for life. I stay alive because I like life, not because death scares me.

But that says nothing directly about the reasonableness of my aversion to it right now.

For the record, it was never my intention to assault the reasonableness of fear of death and the aversion to it. Fear of death is perfectly rational and mostly necessary. I was attempting to rationalize a reason not to fear it.

If you think existing is better than not-existing, it seems to me you have to admit that you do think death is at least relatively bad.

Only bad in the sense that, if I died now, at such a young age, I would not be able to experience the life that was ahead of me. Death does not fear me; not being alive does. This is a thorny semantics appeal, since that statement seems blatantly contradictory. The distinction is that the state of death invokes no fear to me, but the absence of life does.

-------------------
Perhaps my argument does fail under rational scrutiny. Oh well, I tried.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by John Page ... Anyhow, in a sense, we can act in the future. Hi John,
OK, tell me how you can act in the future. My reasoning is as follows. If a man can take actions today that will cause an effect at some time in the future, and that man knows these effects, he can be said to be acting in the future. You say, that a man can act today (means in the present). Yes, I agree. The next step is not really an acting in the future. For example, a man put today an ignited match in the grass in a Forrest. That is the acting in the present. As we have learned from Newton (actio = reactio) and from the law of causality, this caused action in the present will have reactions and effects in a present (present is always now). If it will rain in China, because the fire from the match has spiked the water steam in the air in China with small particels, on that the steam can be changed to a fluid state, this rain also can only drops on china in a present, not in a future. An effect is always in a present; past or future is not real. Science has divided energy (Joule) in Watt and seconds (Ws) or (1 Ws = 1 Joule). But time cannot exist separated from energy; time is coupled to energy ever. Time without energy is a hoax. Modern physicists (CERN) do not need time in their understanding of physical nature. From that past as well as future is a hoax. There is only a present now. Ever. Of, and as for the OP, I can state that I do not want to die. I fear, however, that someday I will die and, perhaps worse, that someday I will want to die. I know, that it is not possible here to discuss that theme free, because of biased believing about the base of the self. But I think it can help to give a proof of that self, that should be physical. AFAIK no materialist has shown by evidence what exact is the own self; there is only a believe, a personal believe. Fact is, that each atom of a 'living' fleshly body is ancient and has exist long before a fleshly body called 'myself' was assembled in a womb. Each atom. Who will claim an physical 'myself' scientifically by what proof? Moreover a fleshly body is as clouds in the sky; most atoms of the fleshly body is exchanged after about seven years. Is your body equal to your body ten or twenty years ago? And are the very same 'myself' ? All spiritual teachers (Jesus, Buddha, Kabir, Giordano Bruno, Guru Nanak, Lao=tsu, Socrates) have tried to help people to understand their 'myself' regarding a spiritual one. But as today the lobby of live (Hebrew HWH) ever have claimed to save physical life. This lobby today is the lobby of Evolution. Sure, physical life has the damned job to preserve live at any circumstances, but other, than this eat an will be eaten this has nothing to do with the real 'myself' that is locked in that body until death. Maybe you can see the stress between such lobby ever in history and spiritual teachers, who have rejected the physical life as of no spiritual use. Materialists never have shown proofs of justice or injustice. But people ask for that. Spiritual teachers have taught in a manner of reason, the spiritual causality in nature loaded on the immortal soul from life to life. Why Thomas (the Gospel Thomas) has spoken about death an fear? To understand the scriptures of the spiritual teachers does not mean to believe in authorities. It is the very own clear cognition of natural laws regarding justice and injustice of acting in each present. Materialists never will understand such spiritual order, it is senseless to discuss this in deep. To label oneself not knowing any reality is silly; to learn to understand reality and to learn to reject unreality - as a future or a past - is the begin of gnosis - cognition. Nature depends not on our theories, but we depends on nature. It seems, that to understand the sense and cause of all that fear is more helpful, as to hide it because of social comfort. The last walk we all go as an single individual. There is no reason to go as well in each present as individual, not inferred by religions, philosophical believe systems or authorities. I think in this freedom from that stuff, one can see and hear some more of that spiritual order containing love and truth, in distance to the loudness of the physical life.

Volker

[Spurious Quirk]

What I believe Secular Elation (and others) have done is, essentially, a form of mental trickery. I say this because I too practiced it, for a long time, and can recognize it for what it is. Basically you take your fear of death and, through careful semantic redefinition and repetition (almost like a mantra) you disassociate that fear from the thoughts that normally trigger it. Thus, the term 'death' and the thought of one's own mortality no longer trigger the same fear sensations.

After a while, you can honestly (sort of) say "I do not fear death". The only problem is when someone points out the more troublesome aspects of death, which you have 'redefined away'. This can lead to SE's statement: "The distinction is that the state of death invokes no fear [in] me, but the absence of life does" -- the 'absence of life' being the one part of death most people have difficulties with (besides the pain of dying).

That said, if you ACTUALLY don't fear death (in its fullest definition), please step away from the edge of the building and go see someone who can help you.

Cheers

[Secular Elation]

It appears that Spurious Quirk has hit the heart of the matter. It is perhaps true that the reasoning in the OP was simple mental trickery, as is decribed. In my response to Phase, I have already condeded the point that the argument against the fear of death is gibberish.

The least I can still say is that I tried to handle the fear of death by attempting to argue against fearing it, even though the points brought up by others in this thread still hold ture and overpower my original assertion.

[Spurious Quirk]

Originally posted by Secular Elation
It appears that Spurious Quirk has hit the heart of the matter. It is perhaps true that the reasoning in the OP was simple mental trickery, as is decribed. In my response to Phase, I have already condeded the point that the argument against the fear of death is gibberish.

The least I can still say is that I tried to handle the fear of death by attempting to argue against fearing it, even though the points brought up by others in this thread still hold ture and overpower my original assertion.

Oh I am not denigrating the use of mental trickery to reduce one's fear of death. Such mental trickery (or mental control, if you prefer that term) is very useful -- you can use it to control your diet, maintain an exercise regimen, etc. Essentially you are just taking command of your brain and rewiring it (as much as possible) to suit your needs.

I entirely agree with you that spending one's life being afraid of death is a terrible waste. To that end, such trickery (or control) should be used to reduce that fear, so that you can make something of your life. That said, I prefer not to use that specific kind of mental tool, because I have found other, better (IMO) tools to achieve this end, which do not require that I decieve myself. Such as attaching (by repeated association) the realization of the futility of 'death-worry' to the complex of thoughts that center around the realization of my own mortality; and generating a habit of mind whereby I simply do not often think about death in the terms that terrify me.

Whatever -- it's up to the preference of the individual; and I wish you all the best in controlling your fear (how ever you do it) and making what you will of your life.

Cheers

[Nowhere357]

Secular Elation
It appears that Spurious Quirk has hit the heart of the matter. It is perhaps true that the reasoning in the OP was simple mental trickery, as is decribed. In my response to Phase, I have already condeded the point that the argument against the fear of death is gibberish.
I'm not convinced your position was all that weak. There are two reasons one may move away from death: a fear of death, or a love of life. They are not mutually exclusive, but neither are they identical.

[Jamie_L]

There is certainly something to be said for rationally examining what not existing really means - and discovering all the things about it that you, in fact, do not have to fear.

If people can get to a place where they don't fear death, that is great. I envy them. My fear, though bottled up and rarely encountered, is so mind-numbingly terrifying when unleashed that I find that I simply must not think seriously upon it lest I get caught in a brief panic attack.

It's a funny thing, this mortal existence.

Not funny ha-ha. Funny ho-ho.

Jamie

[crocodile deathroll]

Greetings

There are two reason I fear death.
One is the nature of the preexisting injury. If I have a small superficial burn that is not at life threatening is often extremely unpleasant let alone the most severe burn injuries which cause a slow death. I personally observed some friends that have endured the most agonizing cancer pain like bone cancer, which terrifies hell out of me if I was diagnosed with the same ailment.

The next fear is the fear of the unknown I cannot assume I know for certain what experiences I may have when my brain is going through an irreversible slide to its destruction. I suspect I would experience nothing but I do not know this for sure and I am in no hurry to find out.



http://www.toysrgus.com/images-art/bradley-clock-talking-strangelove.jpg
This may be the easiest way. Ride a nuke to ground zero

CDR

[paul30]

I think fear of death is circumstantial.

Most people in good health and not in a war zone (Bush is working to change this) probably do not think about their own death too much.

They only do so when they have reason to: a close-call on the highway, a threatening diagnosis, the death of a friend, etc.

But even so, I think most people do not obsess about it.

My experience is that those people who DO obsess about it are either displacing anxiety from something else or (most often) are secretly afraid they have not lived.

That is, they are not afraid of death but having wasted their life.

I also think most people who do have reason to fear death (close call, diagnosis, etc.) do not so much fear death as fear dying--the pain, the anxiety, the loss of function, etc.

[No-Preference]

From Secular Elation
there is nothing to fear, since nothing is what awaits us after death. But I do not actually fear this nothingness. If absolutely nothing awaits us after death, what is there to fear?
I have an impression that you maybe “narrow minded.”
From Secular Elation
Can you remember the "experience" you had before birth? Of course not. There was no experience, no perception, anything.
Than you were born.
From Secular Elation
I am not saying that I can't wait to die, nor that I am enticing the arrival of death. Of course not.
That is why I don't believe there are any “foxhole atheists.”

[Nowhere357]

Originally posted by No-Preference
That is why I don't believe there are any “foxhole atheists.”
? How does "I am not saying that I can't wait to die, nor that I am enticing the arrival of death." mean there are no foxhole atheists?

Why should one's respect for one's life mean that one will become a believer under fire?

I think you just made that up.

[No-Preference]

Originally posted by Nowhere357

Why should one's respect for one's life mean that one will become a believer under fire?

I think you just made that up.

Will become a believer? Did I say “one will become a believer”. Let me check my post.

………

Nope, I do not see that quote, but I could be wrong so let me check it one more time just to be sure.

………

I still do not see it. You wouldn’t be putting words in my mouth, would you Nowhere357? Or are you just making it up.

What’s a believer anyway?

[Philosoft]

Originally posted by No-Preference
That is why I don't believe there are any “foxhole atheists.”
With all due respect, I don't find that topic lends itself very well to general belief. If someone who has seen combat claims to have been an atheist throughout, you might believe him or not. But to state categorically that a priori all such persons are lying or delusional about what they claim to believe seems an untenable position.

[Nowhere357]

No-Preference
Will become a believer? Did I say “one will become a believer”. Let me check my post.

I never said you said that. I asked a question, based on my understanding of your post.

You wouldn’t be putting words in my mouth, would you Nowhere357? Or are you just making it up.
If you find my paraphrase of your statement to inaccurately reflect your position, just say so.

Making it up?
From Secular Elation: "I am not saying that I can't wait to die, nor that I am enticing the arrival of death. Of course not."
I paraphrased that as having respect for one's life.

Your reply: "That is why I don't believe there are any foxhole atheists."
An atheist lacks belief in gods.
A foxhole is a place under fire.
So I paraphrased that as "That (one's respect for one's life) is why I don't believe that there are non-believers in gods, in foxholes".

Which leads to the question "Why should one's respect for one's life mean that one will become a believer when under fire?".

A believer of course is one who believes, and in context that would be belief in gods. Your statement says that you believe that there are no atheists in foxholes, but of course atheists are in the military and find themselves in foxholes - so your statement implies that they undergo a conversion - they become believers.

So no, I did not make it up. And you didn't answer the question.

Why should one's respect for one's life mean that one will become a believer under fire?

[No-Preference]

Originally posted by Philosoft
I don't find that topic lends itself very well to general belief. Do you wish to silence my?
I will not be bully by you. If you have something to say in support your statement then say it.

General belief? Have I missed something? Is that a tenet of Christianity?
Originally posted by Philosoft
If someone who has seen combat claims to have been an atheist throughout, you might believe him or not.
Then I choose not to believe! I think I said, “I do not believe”, but people don’t bother to read my post.

If a person comes to and claims that a UFO has abducted him am I to accept it out of hand just because he said it? Or some that claim to have witness “Big Foot” roaming in his back yard, but through some technical difficulty was unable to get a snap shoot. Am I just to row over in awe?
Originally posted by Philosoft
But to state categorically that a priori all such persons are lying or delusional about what they claim to believe seems an untenable position. Oh, you like to put words into my mouth too. Where did you find that statement? Tell you what. Why don’t I just sit back and let you write all my posts?

I don't believe it is all that "Untenable".

Originally posted by Philosoft
With all due respect, Oh, please. Spare my. For anyone that I find using this phase usually are disingenuous. You respect me by using reasoning.

Have I missed something? Out of the three lines in my original post the last line attracted the must attention. Could I have stumbled onto the atheist “sacred cow”, or their “Holy Grail“? Oops, careful. Do not drop.

Tell me, if you like, what did you do when you read that last line? Did you flight off the handle? Did you ricochet off the walls? Find yourself unable to control your anger, well there is a solution for that. Use reasoning.

One thing is for sure. You can agree or disagree with me, mock me, correct me, praise me, (prefer that you praise me), but you can not scare me or bully me, not even from a moderator.

So for the sake of the moderator Philosoft , I’ll say it again.

3

2

1

That is why I do not believe that there are any “foxhole atheists.”

Now go ballistic.

[Nowhere357]

No-Preference
Could I have stumbled onto the atheist “sacred cow”, or their “Holy Grail“? Oops, careful. Do not drop.
No, you made an invalid generalization.

If a person comes to and claims that a UFO has abducted him am I to accept it out of hand just because he said it?
So you don't believe people when they claim to be a foxhole atheist.

Well, there are no deathbed theists. As we approach death, all of us realize that no one knows whether or not there is an afterlife. If anyone claims different, I don't believe them. [/teach by example mode]

I’ll say it again.
3
2
1
That is why I do not believe that there are any “foxhole atheists.”
Looking at your original post, I see that:
3 "I have an impression that you maybe narrow minded."
2 "Than you were born."
1 "That is why I don't believe there are any "foxhole atheists."

Is this really your argument? :confused: :rolleyes:

[sodium]

Originally posted by No-Preference

What’s a believer anyway?

People often use the word "believer" to mean someone of their religion. So, a Christian may refer to other Christians as believers, or a Muslim to other Muslims.

Around here, I think, we often refer to believers in general. Believers are the kind of people who say things like, "You just have to believe." "I can just sense that Quetzalcoatl loves me". "I have faith." Believers are people who believe in God, gods, demons, devils, ghosts, reincarnation and/or the after life. They believe in forces and entities guiding the universe based on things humans desire and fear. They believe in cosmic forces for justice, or even for revolution. Some believe in divinely favoured races and nations.

I think of myself as an unbeliever. I reject faith, in favour of seriously trying to figure out what is true. So I accept science as a way to give evidence for things without relying on desires and fantasies. And as for the the mystical and supernatural beliefs of the believers, since there is no evidence for them, and they appear simply to have been made up, I think it is quite unlikely that any of them happen actually to be true.

If you understood this, then you could understand why it is possible to fear death and still not believe in the afterlife.

[ComestibleVenom]

When I get Lem's "Motal Engines", I will post a thread wherein a tiny, immotal robot launches into an eloquent vindication of death as he councils Autommathew to kill himself. Quite a fascinating little story. The name of it, by the way, is "Automattew's Friend"

[Philosoft]

Originally posted by No-Preference
Do you wish to silence my?
Certainly not.
I will not be bully by you.
And I don't wish to be a bully, so we'll do fine.
If you have something to say in support your statement then say it.
Okay. How about an anecdote? I know self-proclaimed atheists who claim their atheism was undisturbed during active duty.
General belief? Have I missed something? Is that a tenet of Christianity?
No, what I mean is, 'a belief in an indefensible general principle,' i.e. 'there are no atheists in foxholes.'
Then I choose not to believe! I think I said, “I do not believe”, but people don’t bother to read my post.
"I am an atheist" is a claim about state-of-mind. Your assertion that 'there are no atheists in foxholes' amounts to a claim that you have greater access to another's state-of-mind than the other person.
If a person comes to and claims that a UFO has abducted him am I to accept it out of hand just because he said it? Or some that claim to have witness “Big Foot” roaming in his back yard, but through some technical difficulty was unable to get a snap shoot. Am I just to row over in awe?
We have good objective reasons to believe alien abductions have never occurred. Do you have the same for atheism?
Oh, you like to put words into my mouth too. Where did you find that statement? Tell you what. Why don’t I just sit back and let you write all my posts?
Oh, come on. That's a fair implication. If you assert 'there are no atheists in foxholes,' you implicitly claim that anyone who says, "I am an atheist in a foxhole" is mistaken or lying or delusional.
Oh, please. Spare my. For anyone that I find using this phase usually are disingenuous. You respect me by using reasoning.
Then you should feel quite respected about now.
Have I missed something? Out of the three lines in my original post the last line attracted the must attention. Could I have stumbled onto the atheist “sacred cow”, or their “Holy Grail“? Oops, careful. Do not drop.
No, it's just that you've implicitly called some of my friends liars or lunatics.
Tell me, if you like, what did you do when you read that last line? Did you flight off the handle? Did you ricochet off the walls? Find yourself unable to control your anger, well there is a solution for that. Use reasoning.
Anyone who can read that sort of hostility into my previous post (or this one, for that matter) is looking for a fight. I would advise against that, officially and unofficially.
One thing is for sure. You can agree or disagree with me, mock me, correct me, praise me, (prefer that you praise me), but you can not scare me or bully me, not even from a moderator.
Your paranoia is getting the better of you. Surely you didn't think such a comment would go unchallenged on a board called Internet Infidels?
So for the sake of the moderator Philosoft
I wasn't acting in any moderating capacity before, so please drop the manufactured outrage.
I’ll say it again.

3

2

1

That is why I do not believe that there are any “foxhole atheists.”

Now go ballistic.
I'll need to know what you're referring to before I do. Is that a countdown of some sort?

[mikester]

i do not fear death per se: i do not fear that my existence will one day end and i will no longer be among the living.

HOWEVER, i really REALLY fear dying horribly in some crazy, fucked-up accident or circumstance involving pain and torment.

just my opinion. :)

[Hugo Holbling]

Originally posted by Philosoft
I wasn't acting in any moderating capacity before, so please drop the manufactured outrage.

But i am. Please calm down, No-Preference, and provide your arguments. I'm sure everyone here will be interested to learn why you think there are no atheists in foxholes.

[Peter Kirby]

Originally posted by sodium
If you understood this, then you could understand why it is possible to fear death and still not believe in the afterlife. Shouldn't that be blindingly obvious? The threat of being truly good and dead, being no more, is a good motivator to fear about dying and struggle to avoid it with all of one's being.

There are four options for "life after death": it will be better, it will be the same, it will be worse, and it doesn't exist. All four have been held throughout history. Yet for those who truly believe "it will be better," e.g. that they will go to heaven, shouldn't the fear of death be reduced compared to the others?

best,
Peter Kirby

[sodium]

Originally posted by Peter Kirby
Yet for those who truly believe "it will be better," e.g. that they will go to heaven, shouldn't the fear of death be reduced compared to the others?


It should, and maybe it even is reduced. But we fear death primarily for biological reasons, and our biology isn't always convinced of the things our intellect believes.

But my point is that a lot of this "no atheist in foxholes" is motivated by people who really find it difficult to imagine that you might strongly prefer to believe something about the supernatural, and still not believe it. And I think such people have difficulty understanding because in their own personal experience, they actually do believe things based on their fears and desires. That was partly what I was trying to draw attention to in my believers vs. unbelievers polemic.

[Peter Kirby]

Originally posted by sodium
It should, and maybe it even is reduced. But we fear death primarily for biological reasons, and our biology isn't always convinced of the things our intellect believes.

But my point is that a lot of this "no atheist in foxholes" is motivated by people who really find it difficult to imagine that you might strongly prefer to believe something about the supernatural, and still not believe it. And I think such people have difficulty understanding because in their own personal experience, they actually do believe things based on their fears and desires. That was partly what I was trying to draw attention to in my believers vs. unbelievers polemic. Ah, good point. Thanks for your explanation.

best,
Peter Kirby