What is the beauty in death?

[skylrk93]

It's only natural to fear death, it's just an instinct we've developed over evolutionary history.

 

[Ezekill]

I don't fear death, but at the same time I wouldn't welcome it if it was to come tomorrow. There are still things I would like to accomplish in my life and would prefer to live a bit longer, but also realize that death is inevitable for everyone, and rarely do we choose when we go. I think more so than death most people fear the pain that is usually inherent in death, and the question of what will happen to them when their life here on earth is over.

 

[Apostacious]

The beauty in death lies in its ability to humble even the most egotistical asshole. Otherwise, it forces us all to learn how to give up all that we hold dear, even our own memories, identity and body. I have been in several psychotically depressed states where death and self-disfigurement seemed like the best possible answer to my life at the time, and have learned that the physical process of death isn't what is beautiful, rather it is how we negotiate death that is beautiful.

 

[Vader]

Nothing in this world is ever really "bad"

We've had this conversation before, IIRC, about torture. You claimed that you would rather live on, even if the existence was unthinkably painful, rather than be put out of your misery. I said that I thought you would change your mind if the situation arose. You agreed, but continued to hold the philosophical principle. I've thought about it more, and I don't think that you can separate value from reality like that. I'm not just derailing a thread to continue an old discussion, I have a point that is pertinent to this discussion. We ought not to have principles that we do not apply in the real world. When people talk of doing a bad thing, but for the right reasons, I am confused. Either the action was justified, in which case it was not a bad thing at all, or it was not, in which case there are no right reasons. When people claim that death is beautiful, I think that they would change their mind if it were a friend or loved on who had died. I agree with rangrz, it seems to be one of those abstract positions that can never really be reconciled with the harsh actuality of the world.

Having said that, there is value in death. Death gives our lives structure and meaning. I recall a though experiment (which I have posted about before)- most people, given the choice of living forever or dying now, would choose to die now. Given the option of dying now or making this same choice tomorrow, most people would live until tomorrow, and would probably make that choice ad infinitum. So, much as we value our lives, and prefer life to death, we need at least the possibility of death in order to have a meaningful and fulfilling existence. We have to face death and accept it, if not as beautiful in itself, as part of life, a whole which is beautiful.
/OT rambling

Similar threads merged.

 

[CoffeeDrinker]

not at all. you seem to have decided that they're all in denial and rangrz is the only one who gets it. i'm saying there are other possibilities. that's all.

alasdair

Yes I can be contradictory at times...
part of my charm I guess...%)

I agree that his view, and my view, can be just as distorted as someone who's been totally shielded from death. It's ll a matter of perspective, and who's to say whose perspective is skewed or logical in this area? Death is the end of logic, end of analysis, end of everything brain-related, and all perspectives are are reflections of any given brain's experiences and make-up.
I might've been stoned or something when I was arguing with you before, and I tend to get way too argumentative when I'm stoned. Not in a malicious way or anything, I just like to do it.
When I'm sober I don't see the point in arguing as much unless it's actually an important situation.

But I read a quote from Socrates that said something to the effect of "all philosophies are ultimately aimed at preparing oneself for death."
So while I do think some people in the thread sounded naive, it's probably just that we're not philosophically ready for death. Or maybe I'm just the one who's not.
The idea of being philosophically ready for death is intriguing. What do other people think of that?
Do you think certain actions or events are more-or less necessary in order for such a state to be achieved? Or is it all just a state of mind?

Me personally I think any actions we do are arbitrary. I'm talking about things like that Morgan Freeman movie "The Bucket List." That idea seems cool, and I can understand why you'd wanna do that, and doing something fun(or "out there") just for the sake of doing it before you die is ultimately healthy and well-intentioned, but it's not necessarily making you any more ready for death than the agoraphobic couch potato. Because a person filling up their life with activity could simply be hiding from themselves and their own thoughts, whereas the couch potato could be fiercely courageous in that he's facing the prospect of death head on.

I think Yerg is onto something when he says we ought not have principles that don't translate into reality. Maybe the process of conforming our thoughts to our lives is part of the idea I talk about?

 

[qwe]

So, much as we value our lives, and prefer life to death, we need at least the possibility of death in order to have a meaningful and fulfilling existence. We have to face death and accept it, if not as beautiful in itself, as part of life, a whole which is beautiful.

hypothetically speaking, if we conquer all of the illnesses that lead to death, and the aging process... and hypothetically, if we learn enough about our universe to even dodge whatever death our universe will succumb to (something like heat death, or insert your favorite cosmology scenario)...

and we thus become immortal...

my life right now, in this age, will not be any more, or any less, meaningful, whether we conquer death or not. the "meaningfulness" is right here "in the moment."

any meaning is a part of our neurological structure, and as such, meaning is arbitrary to, as far as we know atm, homo sapiens. this implies that, when we die, we carry nothing that we consider "meaningful" with us, wherever we go (if we indeed go anywhere).

physically speaking, it makes perfect sense... our memories, identity, thought processes, these are physical parts of our brain, and they stop operating when the blood stops coming.

the same reasoning applies to beauty. so, death can be beautiful, sure... but beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. so there have been a lot of ugly, disheartening deaths. and there have been a lot of beautiful deaths. it depends on the person dying, and the people around that person.

I don't think that you can separate value from reality like that.

i agree that this deserves its own thread. as you can probably tell from this post, i separate value from reality quite firmly (or, at least, i try to).

however... if meaning is a part of the human neurological structure... and human brains are part of spacetime, which is part of the universe... there is no disconnect at all i suppose. crap, i just argued against myself.

i haven't read this whole thread... if i'm using any words differently let me know.

-

i'll try to answer the thread title. is death beautiful? um, well, what is beauty?

Beauty is a characteristic of a person, animal, place, object, or idea that provides a perceptual experience of pleasure, meaning, or satisfaction.[citation needed]

sounds like death is beautiful to sociopaths

but "meaning" is included in that definition, so i'll go from there. is death meaningful? again, whether i am immortal or not, i feel the same subjective existential thought/emotion-space at this moment. death is only meaningful subjectively, for us as we try to figure out this universe, and wonder where our loved ones have gone.

"in reality," death is just death..

 

[TheAppleCore]

I've thought about it more, and I don't think that you can separate value from reality like that. I'm not just derailing a thread to continue an old discussion, I have a point that is pertinent to this discussion. We ought not to have principles that we do not apply in the real world.

To me, it's quite the opposite. Values represent ideals that should be approximated as closely as possible, but due to the chaotic nature of reality, can never actually be achieved. For example, total peace on earth is an ideal that I hold. Of course, unless you have a very childish and naive idea of human nature, that is a strictly imaginary state of affairs. Nevertheless, it (in my opinion) should be an important conceptual tool which drives the betterment of mankind.

Having said that, there is value in death. Death gives our lives structure and meaning. I recall a though experiment (which I have posted about before)- most people, given the choice of living forever or dying now, would choose to die now. Given the option of dying now or making this same choice tomorrow, most people would live until tomorrow, and would probably make that choice ad infinitum. So, much as we value our lives, and prefer life to death, we need at least the possibility of death in order to have a meaningful and fulfilling existence. We have to face death and accept it, if not as beautiful in itself, as part of life, a whole which is beautiful.

I remember reading that post, and it never occurred to me, that the experiment implied a deep value in death. But now it is obvious.



Alan Watts points out that death does not really exist, granted that the rest of his ideas are valid. I strongly agree with Mr. Watts' interpretation of reality, and also recommend reading his works and listening to his lectures!