13 replies to this topic

[brokenportal]

Is anybody else furious? Death makes me furious. I rarely if ever think its something to get used to or not let get to you. I actively work to make sure that indifference doesnt take me over. I think about how horrible it is, and why. We have gotten used to hiding our hatred of death. We have niceties at funerals, we call it passing away. People say, "oh tisk, we should never hate anything." No, that is most things, go ahead and hate death. We encourage people to move on, distract themselves from the thought of death.. That might have had its place at one time, but it doesnt any more.

When you dont get furious about death, it allows that indifference to reign, it helps set that example. People look to that and follow suit, they help keep up the tradition. Change that tradition. When people die, the end of the world has come, and it needs to be, it needs to be treated accordingly.


http://www.npr.org/2...r-hitchens-dies


“What do you most value in your friends? Their continued existence."

“Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it.”

“The noble title of "dissident" must be earned rather than claimed; it connotes sacrifice and risk rather than mere disagreement.”

“One must state it plainly. Religion comes from the period of human prehistory where nobody-not even the mighty Democritus who concluded that all matter was made from atoms-had the smallest idea what was going on. It comes from the bawling and fearful infancy of our species, and is a babyish attempt to meet our inescapable demand for knowledge (as well as for comfort, reassurance and other infantile needs). Today the least educated of my children knows much more about the natural order than any of the founders of religion, and one would like to think-though the connection is not a fully demonstrable one-that this is why they seem so uninterested in sending fellow humans to hell.”

Attached Files

•  Hitchens dies, cancer longecity life exension indefinite life extension.jpg   60.7KB   0 downloads

[Elus]

I admired Christopher Hitchens greatly. If he had smoked less, he might have lived longer. The best we can do now is remember and commemorate his work. And fight aging so that this stops happening.

Edited by Elus, 16 December 2011 - 03:06 PM.

[Droplet]

Perhaps another idea for a campaign would be to have a poster with a list of how many great and well-known people we have lost due to aging? Society likes celebrities and perhaps this would get their attention.

[Mind]

I find it strange that educated world-travelers and big-thinkers do not more often consider cryonics. I guess they are just not open-minded enough, or perhaps are not tough enough to beat back the cultural criticism. At some point I would think there would be a tipping point, where enough well-known people join the serious anti-aging movement and/or cryonics that more well-known people will consider cryonics.

[Brainbox]

“One must state it plainly. Religion comes from the period of human prehistory where nobody-not even the mighty Democritus who concluded that all matter was made from atoms-had the smallest idea what was going on. It comes from the bawling and fearful infancy of our species, and is a babyish attempt to meet our inescapable demand for knowledge (as well as for comfort, reassurance and other infantile needs). Today the least educated of my children knows much more about the natural order than any of the founders of religion, and one would like to think-though the connection is not a fully demonstrable one-that this is why they seem so uninterested in sending fellow humans to hell.”

We still do not know what is going on. What we do know still has a high level of uncertainty. And hence individuals do make personal choices that are based on "infantile needs", of which ordinary every day politics is a major one. Or the ill perceived enjoyment of smoking or taking copious dinners. We are only human. May his soul rest in peace.

What we all have to face is that a choice for lifestyle is and must be based on personal choices only. I don't think we are able to judge choices that are made by others in any way. We can, but we are not able. If we do, we are sharing the realm of motivations similar to religions, political dogma's and the like.

Apart from sharing our knowledge, idea's and hypotheses we have to defend (ensure it's continuity and improve) free sharing of information, since that is the major precondition for being able to make personal choices in stead of being sleepy followers. And still we will make radical choices for one aspect and be sleepy followers regarding another.

[Droplet]

What we all have to face is that a choice for lifestyle is and must be based on personal choices only. I don't think we are able to judge choices that are made by others in any way. We can, but we are not able. If we do, we are sharing the realm of motivations similar to religions, political dogma's and the like.

Spot on! No one asks to be born and no one has any right to tell someone how to live as long as they are hurting no one/only hurting themselves and aware of the risks.

Edited by Droplet, 19 December 2011 - 09:44 AM.

[brokenportal]

That is funny, I was thinking just the opposite, "spot off" if you will. Some things can be based on personal choices, but things like reason for example, it seems should not be a personal choice unless you completely contain your belief. Like if you dont assert it to anybody else, especially children. For example teaching religion in school is something that it seems we have the right to tell people they cant do. And no, you dont march in there with guns and force them not to do it. If people do it you dissuade them from doing it at the right times. Tolerating purposeful ignorance is no more useful it seems than tolerating somebodies desire to drive with out taking the road tests, in other words, being purposefully ignorant of the rules of the road. They affect other drivers just like purposefully ignorant thinkers affect other people. If a child is growing up but doesnt want to learn how to walk or use the bathroom then we shouldnt tolerate their want to do that. We should teach them what is right.

[Droplet]

That is funny, I was thinking just the opposite, "spot off" if you will. Some things can be based on personal choices, but things like reason for example, it seems should not be a personal choice unless you completely contain your belief. Like if you dont assert it to anybody else, especially children. For example teaching religion in school is something that it seems we have the right to tell people they cant do. And no, you dont march in there with guns and force them not to do it. If people do it you dissuade them from doing it at the right times. Tolerating purposeful ignorance is no more useful it seems than tolerating somebodies desire to drive with out taking the road tests, in other words, being purposefully ignorant of the rules of the road. They affect other drivers just like purposefully ignorant thinkers affect other people. If a child is growing up but doesnt want to learn how to walk or use the bathroom then we shouldnt tolerate their want to do that. We should teach them what is right.

I was thinking more along the lines of people who smoke/drink too much but don't harm anyone else. Yes those idiots who drink and drive are hurting other people but if someone wants to indulge in a potentially fatal activity, are 100% aware of the risks and are only harming themselves then that's up to them and I don't feel anyone has any right to intervene. Sure, we can teach them and if they already know the risks then I feel that it is no ones place to force them otherwise.

As for religion, I had to deal with a therapist who was a devout Christian many years ago. Whilst I had no issues with his faith, I took issue with him bringing it into my treatment and being too concerned about my unwillingness to serve Jesus and the people around me. Granted, he did his job and helped me a lot but I do agree with you on the point that such beliefs should be kept personal. I also think that people in important jobs like prime minister should never let religion dictate their decisions. I have beliefs, for example I personally don't believe in going out and getting drunk. A lot of my friends do and I would never dare tell them not to do that to feel better because they have chosen that for themselves. I also support life extension. A lot of folk I know don't but I'd never try to choke them on it.

I do think that schools shouldn't be teaching a religious belief system as actual fact but pupils should be made aware of different religious perspectives so that they can at least understand other beliefs. Like you, I think that scientific reason should take priority in education but it doesn't hurt to understand other views.

Edited by Droplet, 20 December 2011 - 05:55 PM.

[Rational Madman]

Given the suicide of his mother, I can't but help to think that his health habits were based on a subconscious desire to slowly kill himself. Superficially, this doesn't seem evident, because he appeared supremely confident. But the volume of his work suggests an incurable insecurity, and extreme self-loathing.

[Droplet]

Given the suicide of his mother, I can't but help to think that his health habits were based on a subconscious desire to slowly kill himself. Superficially, this doesn't seem evident, because he appeared supremely confident. But the volume of his work suggests an incurable insecurity, and extreme self-loathing.

I would go with that theory. Also, as someone said to me a while ago "addiction doesn't discriminate." I have also found this to be true, as I've known stereotypical alcoholics and also ones who were well to do and you would never expect to end up like that. One of the well to do ones also appeared like they were so confident and hadn't a care in the world but still they were hooked on the bottle. Perhaps like Mr Hitchens they too had had deep traumas in their life. However, it is not my place to ask such things and I feel it would be disrespectful. Still...they know the damage it is doing to them and still they choose that path so as sad as it is, it is up to them.

Edited by Droplet, 03 January 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[F.L.U.]

I think you can be furious at anything you don't know or don't understand. If you know that death is just illusion, you will calmly take anyone's pass-away. Nice phrase though, as for me it's passing or going of the one whom I observe as "dead" here to another world (as real as this one) where he/she is still alive and kicking, and in that physical world I or anybody else don't know that this person is "dead" here in this world.
It's a natural conclusion from quantum mechanics' MWI.
A good example of not being afraid of death is Jack London's novel "The Jacket (Star-Rover)",
here's a link to it: http://emotional-lit...e-b/jaket10.htm
Reading literature like this and finding out many latest discoveries in quantum mechanics, nanotechnology and genetics may inspire you with awareness that death is just another event of your eternal life, like changing your clothes.
I believe cryonics is not the branch that will deliver immortality. I vote for nanotechnological modification of ageing- and longevity-associated genes.
I know immortality is accessible... to everyone. Wish you this knowledge and understanding too, because it will free you from any fears (all of them are basically death-related).

[Cuyan]

I was very sad when I learned this.
We need people of his caliber to help win over the people.

Just wanted to post this in here, it seems to fit now, more than ever.

[hooter]

Given the suicide of his mother, I can't but help to think that his health habits were based on a subconscious desire to slowly kill himself. Superficially, this doesn't seem evident, because he appeared supremely confident. But the volume of his work suggests an incurable insecurity, and extreme self-loathing.

Alcoholism and tobacco addiction are also genetically predisposed. Don't be so overhasty to play Dr. Freud here. The only thing I can glean from his work is his intense and justified hatred for religion.

Edited by hooter, 15 January 2012 - 03:07 AM.

[Rational Madman]

In his writings, he has written endearingly about the formative role that his mother's tragic death had on the trajectory of his life, and was quite candid about his frequent bouts with self-loathing. Indeed, by his own admission, he struggled with perpetual self-doubt that stemmed in part from scarring battles with dyslexia, and stuttering---which, of course, he heroically overcame. Based on the volume of his work, one could also conclude that he was sustained in part by a powerful desire to live, but implicit in his lifestyle choices was an exceedingly antagonistic desire to meet a tragic end that would be consistent with the outcomes of some of his literary heroes.

Anyway, by bringing attention to the inner conflict of the deceased, it's not my intention to devalue his work. Rather, I think it's important to maintain objectivity in any analysis, and accept the reliable grayness of our existence.

And yes, addictions are heritable, but their incidence is based on a number of factors that are distinct from genetic markers.