4 ms·

I think a good way to say it might be: I'm not afraid of death, I'm afraid of not existing.

by fhayde 9y ago

jsolson 9y ago
Yes, but given today's technology (and my lack of faith in a suitable deity), I do not have confidence in continuity after corporeal death.
mikekchar 9y ago
I do not fear non-existence. For most of the history of the universe, I did not exist. I have considerable experience with that. Dying appears to be unpleasant, though.
- unclebucknasty 9y ago
  Well, you existed. You just were not assembled in quite the same manner.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - lozf 9y ago
    Like Lego; you build something and play a while... then all the pieces go back in the box 'til next time.
- latexr 9y ago
  In the context of your existing self, non-existing before and after existing are quite different thoughts. The first one is like you don’t remember it, like you don’t remember a lot in your life that you know happened. With the second one you’ll never have the experience of feeling you don’t remember it and you know that. It’s akin to the difference between one day you realising you forgot most of your life, and you now discovering you have Alzheimer’s and will never again hold a moment in memory. To your present self the former is not scary, but the latter is. > For most of the history of the universe, I did not exist. I have considerable experience with that. On the contrary, you have zero experience with not existing because experience implies an impression was made, even if you don’t consciously realise it. Not existing has made (and will make) no difference to you whatsoever, and as such provides no experience, preparation, or comfort. It is the thought of not existing that makes a difference. It won’t by the time I don’t exist, but it does now. --- As a side note, if someone can recommend some good philosophy books on this, I’d appreciate it. I thought the branch that studies it might’ve been ontology, but I’ve read a bit of Sartre’s Being and Nothingness and realised what he’s talking about it not exactly what I’m looking for.
  - jadbox 9y ago
    I have a lecture to recommend: Shelly Kagan on Death by Yale. It's amazing and probably the most important course for anyone willing to open up to ideas around the notion of self and existence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2J7wSuFRl8&list=PLEA18FAF1AD9047B0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2J7wSuFRl8&list=PLEA18FAF1A...
- matte_black 9y ago
  For most of the universe’s history you did exist, but were dead, scattered into atoms all across space. The thing is, after a mere billions of years, you managed to consolidate into a form and became alive. Not a bad deal. But to be dead, is to wait a trillion years for something to happen, only for it to turn out at the end you have to wait a trillion years more, and then you have to continue this forever.
  - cgriswald 9y ago
    Are we talking about atoms when we are talking about ourselves? I don't think so. I am not the same collection of atoms from moment to moment. There may not be an atom in my entire body that is original to my body; and there are vastly more atoms in my body now than then. When I say "me" I don't really mean my body or even my brain, even if that's where "me" is. We are really talking about our consciousness. It's been awhile since I read it, but ... In The Zen of Physics, David J. Darling argues that if some other collection of atoms has a consciousness like our own, that is no different than ourselves. (His idea of consciousness is something like patterns in the brain, which is distinct, if reliant, from a collection of atoms.) We would have no memory of our past experiences, but in a real sense we would be alive again. His arguments are a bit more elegant than I have presented here. And there is some question to whether an identical consciousness with different memories is really you or me, but it would mean that waiting for trillions of years isn't necessarily the case. This, of course, assumes that consciousness is an emergent phenomena. It is possible that consciousness is not emergent from brain processes, but is a fundamental property of the universe that the brain has somehow harnessed because it is an evolutionary advantage. (Physics of Consciousness: The Quantum Mind and the Meaning of Life by Evan Harris Walker is a fun read on this idea.) In which case, in some form you would exist as long as the universe exists, and always have. As an aside, for those without consciousness (i.e. the dead and the unborn) time does not exist, so both "to wait" and "forever" are impossible. :)
    - psyc 9y ago
      Regarding your first paragraph, I don't think that necessarily implies consciousness as an additional thing (not that consciousness doesn't require some explanation that is not forthcoming). You could be talking about a configuration of matter. Not an exact configuration, but one that would be recognizable to a powerful pattern matcher.
- Omnus 9y ago
  This is a common sentiment that fails to take into account the fact that, once you DO exist, you have a desire to continue existing which you did not have prior to your existence.
52-6F-62 9y ago
Time. Afraid of time. At least at this point in it.
spullara 9y ago
My daughter, when she was 6, said it best. "I don't want to lose my sights."

I think a good way to say it might be: I'm not afraid of death, I'm afraid of not existing.

by fhayde 9y ago

I think a good way to say it might be: I'm not afraid of death, I'm afraid of not existing.

Yes, but given today's technology (and my lack of faith in a suitable deity), I do not have confidence in continuity after corporeal death.

mikekchar 9y ago

I do not fear non-existence. For most of the history of the universe, I did not exist. I have considerable experience with that. Dying appears to be unpleasant, though.

unclebucknasty 9y ago
Well, you existed. You just were not assembled in quite the same manner.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- lozf 9y ago
  Like Lego; you build something and play a while... then all the pieces go back in the box 'til next time.
latexr 9y ago
In the context of your existing self, non-existing before and after existing are quite different thoughts. The first one is like you don’t remember it, like you don’t remember a lot in your life that you know happened. With the second one you’ll never have the experience of feeling you don’t remember it and you know that. It’s akin to the difference between one day you realising you forgot most of your life, and you now discovering you have Alzheimer’s and will never again hold a moment in memory. To your present self the former is not scary, but the latter is. > For most of the history of the universe, I did not exist. I have considerable experience with that. On the contrary, you have zero experience with not existing because experience implies an impression was made, even if you don’t consciously realise it. Not existing has made (and will make) no difference to you whatsoever, and as such provides no experience, preparation, or comfort. It is the thought of not existing that makes a difference. It won’t by the time I don’t exist, but it does now. --- As a side note, if someone can recommend some good philosophy books on this, I’d appreciate it. I thought the branch that studies it might’ve been ontology, but I’ve read a bit of Sartre’s Being and Nothingness and realised what he’s talking about it not exactly what I’m looking for.
- jadbox 9y ago
  I have a lecture to recommend: Shelly Kagan on Death by Yale. It's amazing and probably the most important course for anyone willing to open up to ideas around the notion of self and existence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2J7wSuFRl8&list=PLEA18FAF1AD9047B0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2J7wSuFRl8&list=PLEA18FAF1A...
matte_black 9y ago
For most of the universe’s history you did exist, but were dead, scattered into atoms all across space. The thing is, after a mere billions of years, you managed to consolidate into a form and became alive. Not a bad deal. But to be dead, is to wait a trillion years for something to happen, only for it to turn out at the end you have to wait a trillion years more, and then you have to continue this forever.
- cgriswald 9y ago
  Are we talking about atoms when we are talking about ourselves? I don't think so. I am not the same collection of atoms from moment to moment. There may not be an atom in my entire body that is original to my body; and there are vastly more atoms in my body now than then. When I say "me" I don't really mean my body or even my brain, even if that's where "me" is. We are really talking about our consciousness. It's been awhile since I read it, but ... In The Zen of Physics, David J. Darling argues that if some other collection of atoms has a consciousness like our own, that is no different than ourselves. (His idea of consciousness is something like patterns in the brain, which is distinct, if reliant, from a collection of atoms.) We would have no memory of our past experiences, but in a real sense we would be alive again. His arguments are a bit more elegant than I have presented here. And there is some question to whether an identical consciousness with different memories is really you or me, but it would mean that waiting for trillions of years isn't necessarily the case. This, of course, assumes that consciousness is an emergent phenomena. It is possible that consciousness is not emergent from brain processes, but is a fundamental property of the universe that the brain has somehow harnessed because it is an evolutionary advantage. (Physics of Consciousness: The Quantum Mind and the Meaning of Life by Evan Harris Walker is a fun read on this idea.) In which case, in some form you would exist as long as the universe exists, and always have. As an aside, for those without consciousness (i.e. the dead and the unborn) time does not exist, so both "to wait" and "forever" are impossible. :)
  - psyc 9y ago
    Regarding your first paragraph, I don't think that necessarily implies consciousness as an additional thing (not that consciousness doesn't require some explanation that is not forthcoming). You could be talking about a configuration of matter. Not an exact configuration, but one that would be recognizable to a powerful pattern matcher.
Omnus 9y ago
This is a common sentiment that fails to take into account the fact that, once you DO exist, you have a desire to continue existing which you did not have prior to your existence.

52-6F-62 9y ago

Time. Afraid of time. At least at this point in it.

spullara 9y ago

My daughter, when she was 6, said it best. "I don't want to lose my sights."