Posted 20 August 2005 - 09:35 PM
Hey guys,
I wrote a bit about this subject - Fear of Death / Fear of Mortality / Narcissism / Egoism (In my coming book).......... hope you'll find it to your liking:
-Daniel S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Segment VI: The Problem (up)
In a nutshell, death¡¦s coercing, inescapable, all-embracing and enigmatic nature is the pivotal cause for its social deep embedment and assimilation. Even today, scientists still cannot decipher its mysteries, still completely unable to prevent it from transpiring ¡V either by aging, terminal diseases, accidents or violence, whichever; still we fail to answer why do we cease to live, why do we have to die eventually.
¡¨Whence came these seeds of corruption that are sown within this flesh of mine?¡¨ -Asked Rev. Spurgeon, ¡¨why must I die? Why has God made me so curiously and so wondrously¡Xwhy is all this skill and wisdom shown in the fashioning of a man that is to endure for an hour, and then to crumble back to his native element¡Xthe dust?¡¨
In his own religious-oriented way, Spurgeon defines the most fundamental of all human dilemmas with amazing accuracy.
We humans, similar to other sorts of earthly life forms, have an exceedingly virile, basic drive for survival, that is ¡V the protection of our unique physical bodies, our very ¡§being¡¨, from any harm that might bring our physical lives to an end, at all costs.
Ratifying the existence of this instinct is rather easy. Just imagine the reaction of the common man while being threatened at gunpoint. What would it be? ¡VWhat would he¡¦ll be willing to give in exchange for the sparing of his life? ¡VThese questions indeed sound rather rhetorical; their answers self-evident. The particular illustration is usually clear to most of us; however, not everyone is aware of the fact that this drive manifests itself not only in the conscious, volitional level (desire), but in the biological, non-voluntary one as well. The Fight or Flight Response is our body's primordial, automatic and inborn reaction that prepares it to "fight" or "flee" from any sort of perceived harm, attack or potential threat to its survival. It is hardwired in our brains, and is an excellent example of genetic self-preservation wisdom. It actually corresponds to an area of our brain called the hypothalamus, which, when stimulated, initiates a sequence of nerve cell firing and chemical release (Adrenaline, Noradrenaline and Cortisol), causing our body to undergo a series of very dramatic changes - our respiratory rate increases, blood is shunted away from our digestive tract and directed into our muscles and limbs (which require extra energy and fuel for running-away or fighting), our pupils dilate, our awareness intensifies, our sight sharpens, our impulses quicken, our perception of pain diminishes and our immune system mobilizes with increased activation. All of these changes occur for one simple supreme cause ¡V physically and mentally preparing ourselves for running away from the mortal danger or facing it with greater readiness; to survive.
Dr. Ernest Becker, a renowned cultural anthropologist of the 20th century, has noted and clarified in his magnum-opus, The Denial of Death, a rather similar concept:
¡¨Through countless ages of evolution, the organism has had to protect its own integrity; it had its own [unique] physicochemical identity and was dedicated to preserving it.¡¨ [bb]
In nature, protection of personal integrity means rigid self-concern. Indeed, this may be easily ratified through examining the modern technology of organ transplantation: biologically, the organism that we are protects itself at all costs from any sort of foreign matter, without consulting our will; ¡§even if it is a new heart that would keep it alive¡¨, as Becker had so finely put, ¡§the protoplasm itself harbors its own, nurtures itself against the world, against invasions of its integrity.¡¨ [bb]
This, in reality, is the true essence of survival among the living realm of nature: egocentrism. On the one hand, man, being a plain part of nature ¡V differs not in tendency. Man, on the other ¡V is an entirely different case, as his unique identity is completely conscious to him, and accordingly - so does its worth and the great need to preserve it. Unlike the rest of the living, it is not restricted to a biological and instinctive (non-volitional) level. This elevates man¡¦s organismal tendency for egocentrism to the level of narcissism, as Freud had so eloquently persisted ¡V that each and every one of us repeats the tragedy of the mythical Greek hero, Narcissus. We are, driven by our instinct for survival, ceaselessly absorbed with ourselves.
"Loving oneself," Freud argued, ¡§is the libidinal complement to the egoism of the instinct of self-preservation". He initially used the term libido to define the urge and desire to create life (sexual drive), and later the energies which are associated with all constructive human activity.
In Freudian psychology, narcissism is identified as the natural state in which the ego* itself becomes the object of libidinal investment - the person is ¡§in love¡¨ with himself. All living beings possess instincts to nourish themselves and to protect themselves from danger; this is accomplished through intense applying of self-concentration; man, on top of that, possesses strong and conscious desire for the exact same goals: to survive and prosper; to preserve his physical state of being alive. In practice, this is accomplished through narcissism: great self love and admiration.
*In psychoanalytic theory, the ego refers to the portion of the human personality which is experienced as the "self" or "I" and is in contact with the external world through perception. It is the part which remembers, evaluates, plans, and in other ways is responsive to and acts in the surrounding physical and social world. [pn]
In his famous early essay, On Narcissism, Freud called this basic, sexually/constructively charged desire directed at the self - primary narcissism. He distinguished primary narcissism from secondary narcissism ¡V a condition that rises in severe pathological states (e.g. schizophrenia) in which the person's libido significantly withdraws from objects in the external world and produces megalomania. The secondary narcissism of the mentally ill is, as Freud suggested, a magnified, extreme manifestation of primary narcissism (which normally exists in all individuals). Secondary narcissism, then, is neither normal nor healthy.
Freud tried strengthening his premise on primary narcissism through inspecting a radical example: the ill individual. He found immense fascination in the way a person suffering from illness withdraws interest from his external surroundings inasmuch as it does not concern his affliction. He also considered a work by Wilhelm Busch, a noted German poet of the 19th century, which depicts how the very soul of a person suffering from toothache becomes utterly focused on it. Freud claimed that during a state of illness (threat), the libido is drawn even deeper into the ego; this is why ill people become more self-involved: their libido withdraws from external objects to be invested in the present situation of the ego; their primary narcissism explodes in a clamor for survival. This is, of course, channeled to strengthen our selves in times of trouble.
Freud did not neglect to explore the theme of love, supposedly the ultimate antagonism of narcissistic slant. To love someone, in Freud's model, is to extend libido outward to an object, thus depleting the supply of libido available for narcissistic investments in one's own ego. In this concern, Freud applied to the matter of self-regard, which, according to his work - has an especially intimate dependence on narcissistic (directed at the self) libido.
Loving, then, naturally contributes to the lowering of self-regard. Having one's love returned, however, re-elevates one's self-regard and replenishes one's narcissism. Freud reminds us that the very aim and satisfaction in a narcissistic object-choice is to be loved; therefore - when one is loved, self-regard is heightened, while not being loved lowers self-regard. He characterized love as a dialect in which one has to give in order to get. Thus he derived that a dysfunctional or unbalanced (in the dialectical structure) love relationship may lead to various kinds of psychological disturbances, due to dissatisfaction of narcissism.
This fact has numerous bearings on our everyday lives; incidentally, perhaps this explains why we regard luck almost exactly as Aristotle had more than a couple millennia ago, ¡§luck is when the guy next to you gets hit with the arrow¡¨.
Becker had sketchily demonstrated the deep rooted singularity of man: ¡§If you took a blind and dumb organism and gave it self-consciousness and a name, if you made it stand out of nature and know consciously that it was unique, then you would have narcissism.¡¨
Plainly, man¡¦s distinguishable narcissism may be recognized as a more evolved, or even conscious form of instinctive egocentrism, of biological self-centeredness aimed for survival at all cost.
Our survival-oriented narcissism supplies us with a sense of potentially-infinite worth, of being invaluable. This is allowed for our unique cognitive capacity, as Becker had eloquently elucidated:
¡§Man is not just blind glob of idling protoplasm, but a creature with a name who lives in a world of symbols and dreams and not merely matter. His sense of self-worth is constituted symbolically, his cherished narcissism feeds on symbols, on an abstract idea of his own worth, an idea composed of sounds, words, and images, in the air, in the mind, on paper. And this means that man¡¦s natural yearning for organismic activity, the pleasures of incorporation and expansion, can be fed limitlessly in the domain of symbols and so into immortality. The single organism [man] can expand into dimensions of worlds and times without moving a physical limb.¡¨ [gg]
Freud and Becker¡¦s reasoning on narcissism sheds light on our endless struggle towards the strengthening of our self-esteem, in every possible channel. We always strive to be secure with it, as it is the cornerstone of our survival; a healthy sense of self-esteem, a conscious recognition of our invaluableness - has always prompted self-preservation.
The renowned psychotherapist, Nathaniel Branden, had defined self-esteem as ¡§the disposition to experience oneself as competent to cope with the basic challenges of life¡K¡¨
Indeed, high self-esteem is crucial to our survival for its positive impact on self-competence, that is - the generalized sense of our own efficacy or ability to deal effectively with life¡¦s challenges and to attain challenging goals.
This illustrates why people with a low, unhealthy level of self-esteem are often being trodden on by those who possess higher levels; broader recognition of our worth always had contributed to the prospect of survival. Such recognition is essential for our survival as social beings; I assume this reasoning had prompted Anthony Trollope, the renowned English novelist to advise us: "never think that you're not good enough yourself¡K people will take you very much at your own reckoning."
In any event, a great body of modern research ratifies this concern; studies show that individuals who possess high levels of self-esteem tend to be at less risk for depression hj and hopelessness pj. High self-esteem have been found and proven to trigger enthusiasm and optimism, motivating people to pursue their goals and to persevere in the face of obstacles j7; it was also found to be implicated in good mental health lk.
On the other hand, low levels of self-esteem have been linked to problems such as use of drugs aa, alcohol abuse r2, suicide, and eating disorders. Relative to individuals with high self-esteem, those who possess lower levels tend to be more anxious, depressed, jealous, and lonely f1.
Incidentally, it is important to note that similar to many other human features, exceedingly high levels of self-esteem (i.e. secondary narcissism) is dangerous to one¡¦s survival.
And so, while the lesser beast may find optimal prospect of survival per its instinctual tendency for egocentrism, man has to constantly work to sustain his feelings of self-worth, to consciously feed his primary narcissism.
The Fear of Death (up)
Only naturally, our basic instinct towards survival (self-preservation) and the resultant, imperative tendency towards rigorous, evolved egocentrism ¡V are bound to produce a crucial impact. In practice, our bestial drive for unconditioned survival, combined with the conscious healthy-minded sense of invaluableness - manifests itself with the display of negative emotions (e.g. fear, extreme terror, and aversion) and behavior (e.g. aggression or avoidance) to anything that might threaten to extinguish the physical state of being alive. This extinguishment is fully corresponding to the occurrence of death; this I have already exemplified earlier: the ordinary man under a pressing and immediate threat to his life would most definitely plead to be spared; not only will his body react automatically and involuntarily to the perceived mortal danger (through the basic need for survival, generated by instinct), but he will also be consciously desirous to survive and remain alive (mainly through recognizing his own personal worth to himself, and to his genetic continuity - his offsprings). We are being constantly driven to maintain the physical state of being alive, and to master everything that might endanger it. In actuality, within each and every one of these potential dangers, there sits a common menace: death; cessation of life; physical non-survival.
To successfully elude a mortal danger, we¡¦re naturally bound to fear its outcome, find it aversive and negative. Dr. Gregory Zilboorg, a noted psychoanalyst of the 20th century, too had contemplated this:
¡§Such constant expenditure of psychological energy on the business of preserving life would be impossible if the fear of death were not as constant. The very term ¡§self-preservation¡¨ implies an effort against some force of disintegration; the affective aspect of this is fear, fear of death.¡¨[16]
The fear of death (will be referred to as FoD), then, must be constantly present at the very foundation of our mental functioning, lest the organism that we are would not be properly equipped towards physical self-preservation; that is, for suitably dealing with life-threatening situations and perils. One may even dare say this fear is the very agent which motivates us to act with almost superhuman capabilities in the face of mortal peril, and to cling to our lives with such startling fervidness.
The Fear of Mortality (up)
But the mental functioning of man is by no means simple. What truly differentiates us from all other life forms, as I have formerly argued - is no other than our sophisticated and definitely unequaled cognitive capability; this includes the capacity for temporal and self-reflective thought. This uniqueness retains yet another significant repercussion which will be regarded from this point onward.
It seems that while our exceptional intelligence easily may be counted as a blessing, it too has a bit of a ¡§down side¡¨, as Kohelet had so finely put.
The crux of the matter is that our unique capacity soon provides us with the awareness of our very own mortality (i.e. eventual and assured death, physical non-survival). This immediately gives birth to an exceedingly forceful conflict; to which I¡¦ll refer as PEC (Primal Existential Clash).
On one side there is:
I. Our basic organismal instinct for survival at-all-costs „³ a biological, non-volitional need towards physical preservation of life.
II. The prehension of our potentially infinite worth, per our unique evolved sense of natural egocentrism (narcissism).
III. Our natural tendency towards fearing the unknown „³ clinging to the certain, avoiding the uncertain.
IV. Resulting from II & III „³ a conscious desire towards physical (certain) preservation of life.
V. Resulting from II „³ a fundamental desire for permanence; perpetuity of at least a tinge of our uniqueness, our cherished invaluable beauty.
On the other:
1. The awareness of our own inescapable mortality; that is, our eventual compelled death and personal destruction „³ prehension of our warranted physical non-survival.
2. The fact that the very nature of death, the greatest of all mysteries, is too the epitome of uncertainty.
3. The outright uncertainty which lies in the foreseen realization nature of our mortality (e.g. exact manner, timing etc¡¦).
In the field of psychology, the term conflict is ordinarily used to define the arousal of two or more strong motives that cannot be solved together k. From this definition I will not deviate.
In the fascinating inner world of man, in sense of incongruity degree - there clearly are no worthy matches for the aforementioned clashing motives.
Like many intimate conflicts, PEC produces the potential for paralyzing terror, threatening to impede our normal every-day functionality. The outcome of this unavoidable confrontation is known as the fear of mortality.
This particular, most intriguing fear (will be addressed to as FoM) has two main facets to which I¡¦ll be devoting the rest of the chapter:
I. An active fear of a genuine threat to our long-term physical survival (clash between arguments I + IV and 1 + 3).
II. An active worriment for the prospect of our desired permanence (clash between arguments V and 1 + 2).
Naturally, a great contributor to the extent of latter facet of FoM is the immense uncertainty which so well enshrouds the very concept of death; the great and ageless unknown.
Generally, by the term uncertainty - I refer to situations in which the probabilities are unknown, ¡§where the information available to the decision-maker is too imprecise to be summarized by a probability measure¡¨ [wq]. Uncertainty has been found and proven to be anxiety provoking; uncertainty about the future can give rise to intense feelings of apprehension [dq]. For example, with probabilities that are not easily calculated, a treatment may return a patient to full health, may have no effect at all, may kill the patient, or may be of only partial benefit. The uncertainty (or ¡§vagueness¡¨ or ¡§ambiguity¡¨) that accompanies this situation induces an aversive reaction, the strength of which increases with the degree of uncertainty, the consequences involved, and the period of delay until the uncertainty is resolved [dq].
A research conducted by Epstein and Roupenian in the early 70¡¦s examined subjects¡¦ anxiety to the threat of pain (electric shocks). The findings indicated that those with a higher certainty of the shock (a 19 in 20 chance) were less anxious than the subjects with a lower certainty of a shock (a 1 in 20 chance). Moreover, studies by Kent (1984) and Arntz (1990) both indicate that non anxious patients have a more accurate estimation of the extent of pain during certain invasive procedures than their anxious counterparts who tend to overestimate levels of pain.
Behavioral science professor, George Wu, depicted two general reasons why the ordinary person favors certainty to uncertainty. First, complete or relative certainty regarding a situation may facilitate physical preparedness: planning for the future is more difficult in the face of unresolved uncertainties. Also, it may facilitate psychological preparedness, as Wu had noted:
¡§When resolution of uncertainty is delayed, psychological considerations such as anxiety, anticipation, dread, hope, and impatience are relevant; knowing what the future will bring may permit psychological preparedness, even if nothing can be done to affect this future.¡¨[fz]
Truly, is there any objective certainty regarding the enigmatic nature of death apart from the physical dissolution it imposes upon our bodies and minds?
The same case persists when considering the concept of mortality; truly, the only certain thing about it is that it is inevitable and thus shared by all; any further detail is mostly beyond our grasps. Naturally, this reduces the level of our physical and psychological readiness unto a scanty measure; for that, the extent of potential uncertainty-related anxiety in both facets of FoM is understood by itself.
Our quest for insight will naturally begin with deliberation and analysis of the first facet; a fear of physical non-survival.
As you may have already realized, the fear of mortality, unlike the basic and essential fear of death ¡V cannot constantly be attendant within our consciousness. This is because FoD is generally non-active; this fear response manifests itself mainly upon thinking of or perceiving a specific threat to our immediate or short-term survival; it is steadily lurking within our mental functioning on a ¡§standby mode¡¨, never oppressing our consciousness in a chronic manner. A fear response to death normally rises only in time of need. For that, a fair portion of FoD is not just ¡§healthy¡¨, but also valuable beyond extent. There are, of course, various abnormal neuroses of excessive presence of such fear which impedes normal functionality. These abnormalities may occur through excessive contemplation of hypothetical or real, long or short term threats to our survival; this obsession brings about the arousal of the FoD response in the same manner a perceived, real threat to our immediate survival does. Naturally, such overly-frequent contemplations and lingering obsession with mortal threats result in functionality impediment due to prolonged high levels of mental stress. I¡¦d rather abstain from delving any deeper into the subject of fear of death neuroses, as it is of less concern to us.
In any event, the fear of death is to be distinguished from that of mortality; instead of ordinarily strengthening the prospect of our survival, the latter does the exact opposite. Mortality, like any other sort of contemplated or perceived threat to our physical survival (lasting self-preservation), stimulates the physiological and psychological response of fear to it. Unlike all other threats, however, that of mortality is enduring and unyielding; thus in potential, so is its resultant fear response.
As I¡¦ve hinted earlier, a chronic presence of fear or intense anxiety of any sort imposes severe mental stress upon the individual. When it comes to mental functionality, it is known that lasting high levels of stress are more than liable to produce psychosis - a mental illness that markedly interferes with a person's capacity to meet life's everyday demands. In a specific sense, it refers to a thought disorder in which reality testing is grossly impaired x. Despite this radical example, chronic high stress levels have been proven to produce various emotional symptoms which too threaten to impede functionality; these may be depression, moodiness, irritability, frustration, memory problems and lack of concentration.
Lasting high stress levels can also directly or indirectly share on bringing about various bodily disorders, by having a major physiological impact on our systems. Such stress raises normal level of adrenaline and corticosterone (a hormone involved in regulation of fuel metabolism and immune reactions) in the body, which in turn increases the heart-rate, respiration, blood-pressure, thus putting more physical stress on vital bodily organs. This means such stress may serve as a great contributing factor in heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke and other illnesses. Despite these radical impediments, lasting high level of stress is often associated with sleep disturbances, fatigue, weight gain or loss, eating disorders, muscle tension, skin problems (hives, eczema, psoriasis, tics, itching), reproductive problems, growth inhibition, immune system suppression (frequent colds, flu, infections), migraine headaches, upset or acid stomach, cramps, heartburn, irritable bowel syndrome and the list goes on.
The bottom line is that the mere knowledge and awareness of mortality, the ability to contemplate it with ease - threatens to abuse the very mechanism which is dedicated for ensuring our lasting self-preservation: the fear response. Our exceptional cognitive capacity betrays the very nature of the unexceptional survival-oriented, egocentric organism we all are.
This particular threat, unlike all others, is comprehensively and constantly present; our mortality is always there to haunt us; it is assured and is plain as the nose on one's face.
A significant concern is that the threat of mortality, unlike any other ¡V is conceptual and not specific by essence; that is to say, we are totally oblivious of its future realization manner in practice, whether it¡¦ll be by accident, disease, murder etc¡¦; the same applies for its actual timing. Rev. Spurgeon too had acknowledged it despite his puissant shelter of religion and faith: ¡§the means, the way I shall die, how long I shall be in dying, the sickness and in what place I shall be seized with the contagion, all these are ordained. God hath in his mind's eye the wave that shall engulf me, or the bed in which I shall breathe out my last. He knows the stones that shall mark my sleeping place, and the very worm that shall crawl over this face when it shall be cold in death¡K But to me it is quite uncertain. I know not when, nor where, nor how I shall breathe out my life.¡¨[aq]
Of course, we may try and implement deliberate guesswork on these details - the ordinary healthy man may justifiably assume his mortality to be fulfilled sometime during his old age period of life, due to natural causes; while one who suffers from AIDS, on the other hand, may accordingly foresee his time to be much sooner. The bottom line is that in terms of uncertainty level, mortality¡¦s nature prevails. This, as I¡¦ve earlier stated, has an obvious bearing on the extent of its potential, resultant fear of non-survival.
On top of that, when it comes to certainty of realization, mortality too gets the upper hand; this is pertinent in comparison to every other specific threat. Indeed, deep within the recesses of one¡¦s mind - hope for physical survival may somewhat glimmer while considering a specific menace; however, none shines at all when it comes to the threat of mortality. In reality, mortality¡¦s conceptual essence is what makes it so terrible to bear.
We may, for instance ¡V ponder on a hypothetical possibility for us to develop cancer and perish from it; however, we know at the same time that there is too an undetermined probability for us to be spared from this dire malady, a chance to escape and transcend it. Such minimal speckle of hope is what allows us to manage our lives peacefully without abuse of the FoD response.
This illustration is relevant in cases of real threats as well; supposing we do suffer from cancer or other vicious malady - in such case, we may eagerly prompt our physicians to provide us with deliberate prognosis for survival - while not being necessarily accurate, it does well in providing the minimal speckle of hope required to keep us from falling apart; this is added to our past knowledge of people who overcame similar illnesses and survived. In this case, then, physical non-survival is not utter and predetermined.
Whenever there is hope, there is life. Every day, we hear of many courageous survivors ¡V ¡§miraculous¡¨ cheaters of death; be it the mortal threats imposed by nature (natural disasters), car accidents or lethal diseases such as the above example; but then again, we never seem to hear of physical immortals; we are aware of the fact that each and every one of our favored survivors would one day succumb to the exact same fate they had once so well evaded.
When considering the concept of mortality; no hope beams at our direction. As Rev. Spurgeon had so eloquently put: ¡§Die I must; I may have escaped a thousand diseases, but Death has an arrow in his quiver that will reach my heart at last.¡¨[aq]
Mortality offers no glimmer of hope whatsoever; the prospect of escaping it seems nonexistent in the same manner tomorrow¡¦s absence of sunrise does to most of us. Surely, everyday experience manages to teach us that well enough; we observe people around us being overwhelmed by their mortality without cease and definitely without exception; add to it the fact that from a very early age we are being taught of its inevitability by close socialization agents.
The totality of mortality¡¦s menace is unfathomable beyond comparisons. On the one hand, on account of its conceptual essence and the justified lack of hope for possible elusion - the threat of mortality is durable and unrelenting; on the other, the nature of its practical realization is hidden from us throughout our lives; it is principally uncertain.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to assume that provided mortality¡¦s resultant lingering fear of non-survival is not managed properly, our overall prospect for survival seems pretty much at stake. As I¡¦ve already demonstrated, a chronic fear response of any sort encourages a chronic presence of elevated stress level and thus imperils the functionality of both our biological role as reproductive organisms, and our social one as people, cultural beings.
Corpus Fatalis (up)
We humans were always aware of being different, of being unique. From time immemorial, we have acknowledged the existence of something ¡§deep down¡¨, our incomparable essence, which characterizes us and virtually separates us from all other life forms.
Becker noted that this unique essence of man can be related the very paradox of his existence: the fact that man is but a half-animal, half-symbolic being. While the narcissistic symbolic-self naturally grants man a potentially infinite worth in a ¡§timeless scheme of things¡¨, his natural animal¡¦s body deteriorates and gradually loses its worth and capability.
This existential paradox is often referred to as the condition of individuality within finitude:
¡§Man has a symbolic identity that brings him sharply out of nature. He is a symbolic self, a creature with a name, a life history. He is a creator with a mind that soars out to speculate about atoms and infinity, who can place himself imaginatively at a point in space and wonderingly contemplate his own planet. This immense expansion, this dexterity, this ethereality, this self-consciousness gives to man literally the status of a small god in nature, as the Renaissance thinkers knew¡¨.[26]
The other side of the paradox is man¡¦s subjugation to nature, similar to animals, when it comes to the big picture:
¡§At the same time, as the Eastern sages also knew, man is a worm and food for worms. This is the paradox: he is out of nature and hopelessly in it [simultaneously]; he is dual, up in the stars and yet housed in a heart-pumping, breath-gasping body... His body is a material, fleshy casing that is alien to him in many ways ¡V the strangest and most repugnant way being that it aches and bleeds and will decay and die. Man is literally split in two: he has an awareness of his own splendid uniqueness in that he sticks out of nature with a towering majesty, and yet he goes back into the ground a few feet in order to blindly and dumbly rot and disappear forever. It is a terrifying dilemma to be in and to have to live with. The lower animals are, of course, spared this painful contradiction, as they lack a symbolic identity and the self-consciousness that goes with it. They merely act and move reflexively as they are driven by their instincts. If they pause at all, it is only a physical pause; inside they are anonymous, and even their faces have no name. They live in a world without time, pulsating, as it were, in a state of dumb being. This is what has made it so simple to shoot down whole herds of buffalo or elephants. The animals don¡¦t know that death is happening and continue gazing placidly while others drop alongside them. The knowledge of [eventual] death is reflective and conceptual, and animals are spared of it. They live and they disappear with the same thoughtlessness: a few minutes of fear, a few seconds of anguish, and it is over. But to live a whole lifetime with the fate of death [i.e. mortality] haunting one¡¦s dreams and even the most sun-filled days ¡V that¡¦s something else.¡¨ [26]
I¡¦d like to continue our most-exceptional quest for insight with the deliberation and analysis of the latter facet of FoM, with which you have already been acquainted: a fear (or aversion) of impermanence.
A significant portion of FoM commonly consists of fear from personal termination, unconditioned finality, oblivion and utter destruction of our essence. Obviously, these horrors threaten to hinder one of the most basic of human desires.
Our yearning for permanence originates from the recognition of our inestimable worth, our basic survival-oriented narcissistic disposition. The fear of impermanence, then, is mainly generated by the clash between our basic desire combined with our natural distaste of uncertainty on the one hand, and:
I. The certain, practical consequence of death (physical impermanence, the ending of life as we know it).
II. The uncertain nature of death; the great mystery of post-death.
In argument I, ¡¨life as we know it¡¨ refers to the current, conscious and tangible lives we all share; our assured ¡§state of existence¡¨ in our familiar physical environment. We know very well from simple observation that death terminates these particular lives for its victims; indeed, their corpses ratify this concern without further ado.
Death¡¦s undeniable, bitter impact on life shakes and agitates the very confidence we have in the prospect of our permanence. Under death¡¦s negative consequence and ¡§terminative connotation¡¨, common intuition naturally and justifiably depicts it as a potential hazard for permanence.
Regarding the latter argument; when it comes to permanence, our sense of confidence in it is naturally expected to be high in nothing less than a remarkable manner. But how could it ever be elevated to such extent in the face of bleak vagueness; without any sort of reassuring information on the great beyond?
The fear of impermanence haunts men like nothing else, pressingly demanding a pain-relieving proceeding. Soon we shall see and understand just how this particular portion of FoM acts as a mainspring for human activity, activity that is essentially designed for mentally avoiding the notion of death¡¦s fatality, overcoming it by denying in some way that it is but the final frontier, the final destiny for men ¡V ruin and oblivion.
The crux of the matter is that, consciously or not - nobody wants to die. By saying die in this context, I do not refer to the biological status of death, I more likely mean ¡V perish forever, become extinct, forgotten, and evanescent in a terrible oblivion; so to speak, to become non-existent.
Truth to tell, most men crave somewhere deep ¡V for some sort of conscious continuity, some sort of lasting aware existence. Others are willing settle for some sort of permanent preservation of at least a tinge of what makes them unique*.
*Such is the case with Hindu reincarnation, for instance; according to their belief, all individuals possess eternal jiva-atmas (souls) which pass from one plane of existence and carry with them samskaras (impressions) from former states of being.
This yearning for permanence is a quintessential, all-inclusive human desire that has its roots deeply imbedded in basic human nature: primary narcissism.
The majority of human beings have always found it utterly difficult to accept the notion of a transitory ¡§state of existence¡¨. Despite our inborn biological need and conscious desire towards physical survival, almost all of us crave, in the depths of our hearts, for a boundless state of being; the lastingness of our mysterious essence or soul, preferably our self-awareness and personality as well - in this physical world or another postulated, fantastical or imaginary one, whichever. While this would be rather hard to prove and verify directly, it may be easily inferred by way of negation: the fact that almost none of us desires oblivion, erasure and unconditioned finality.
In the game board of existence there is no ¡§middle way¡¨. It is either black or white. In such case, only two polarized alternatives are relevant - existence or non-existence; lastingness or extinction. While existence or lastingness may be partitioned into numerous possibilities and dazzling forms that have been suggested throughout history ¡V their common ground is apparent: preservation of a certain extent of our unique and cherished beauty, be it our souls or mental identities in some cases, atmas in others and so forth.
The latter alternative, on the other hand, has no such creative diversity. If we despise it; if we privately or manifestly dislike the notion of losing our unique invaluable beauty that is us; and if clearly there are no other reasonable alternatives rather than the aforementioned essential couple - this means we are necessarily obliged to crave for the former: a permanent state of being*; yearning for some sort of lasting existence, preservation of our unique beauty. As we¡¦ll later find out in chapter two, the term some sort retains many fascinating implications; in spite of this, in all post-death spiritual survival creeds we¡¦ll come across - the common ground remains virtually identical by essence: a prospect of lasting existence.
At any rate, the firm argument in favor of our obligatory desire for existence remains valid even in the absence of an explicit verbal admission or in claiming for indifference. Truly, one could by no means be indifferent toward his existence while at the same time despising its contrast. This rouses a routine logical contradiction; for indifference towards existence necessarily requires indifference towards non-existence as well ¡V and this is rarely the case; few are the ones who are truly indifferent between the two, these may either be individuals with severe suicidal tendencies or deep and chronic frustration from their physical lives.
If we openly or privately despise the notion of our unconditioned finality, our non-existence - than we cannot possibly be indifferent towards some sort of existence, we have to yearn for it.
*Again, I¡¦d like to emphasize that this includes any sort of existence one could possibly bear through his fecund imagination; it isn¡¦t restricted to the physical sort we experience while being alive thanks to the flexibility of our cognitive capacity.
Despite that, all cases of an individual¡¦s indifference or even forthright desire towards non-existence are quite disputable upon closer scrutiny. This is on account of the fact that it is quite impossible for us, mere dwellers of existence, to try and imagine ourselves non-existent; to grasp the true meaning of this abstract concept. We may visualize our own deaths, funerals and the ongoing life without us, but it is we who perform this visualization; we are there to witness the events after our decease. We remain conscious, in existence. And it does not matter at all how far our imagination might reach, either to the distant past or the mysterious future, we ourselves inevitably remain the very audience of all contemplations. We have absolutely no way of fathoming the true consequences of non-existence, and thus when one consciously wishes for his own death (while trying to find solace by the fact that perhaps non-existence would be preferable in comparison to his harsh and unbearable state of physical existence), he¡¦s actually delving into the realm of the utmost unknown, without previous empirical findings and markers to guide him in the worthiness of this critical decision. So how could one crave or be indifferent towards something which is essentially unknown to him?
