5 ms·

Death by Thomas Nagel (1970) [pdf]

36 points by wjb3 3y ago

ngvrnd 3y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- thereticent 3y ago
  What seems unlikely? This is a whole essay addressing various ways of reasoning about the value of death to a person. I'm feeling frustrated that the engagement with this kind of content on HN is bald and unclear assertion. (This is not directed solely to you, but also to the other commenter so far).
  - bongodongobob 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - kikokikokiko 3y ago
      It's not that philosophy is dumb. It's just that it's useless. Nobody has any clue about what the fuck are we doing here or if there is any reason to it at all, so philosophy in the end is just a debate about the gender of the angels. It's a waste of time, and mocking/ignoring it is the most reasonable attitude one can have.
      - rstefanic 3y ago
        > It's not that philosophy is dumb. It's just that it's useless. If I take a moment and think through that statement, I highly doubt you even believe this. And if it is sincere, then it just reinforces the point of the person that you were replying to. Do you think logic is useless? What about ethics and politics? What counts as science? What counts as knowledge? These are all philosophical inquiries. Even your statement that it's "useless" is a philosophical judgement. What makes something "useful" and not a waste of time? I guess you can make the argument that certain fields within philosophy are useless, but at this point, you're already doing philosophy again. You can try and ignore philosophy, but you're not going to avoid doing it. At worse, you'll just be doing it poorly.
      - dang 3y ago
        "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - dang 3y ago
      "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." It's reliably a marker of bad comments and worse threads. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dang 3y ago
  Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.
cupcakecommons 3y ago
Death is only scary because of its potential impermanence corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. Being afraid of permanent death makes about as much sense as being afraid of going to sleep. Lots of words here for very little insight.
- layer8 3y ago
  Like most if not all emotions, fear of death makes a lot of sense evolutionarily. That’s why it’s an integral part of us humans. It’s an interesting question if that would be different if death wasn’t necessarily permanent.
- thereticent 3y ago
  Explain a little more. I'm not understanding why the "potential impermanence" of death is a factor at all, much less why that potential impermanence is corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. To me it sounds like you're claiming that it makes us nervous that death might not last, and somehow realizing that being alive in the first place being improbable makes that nervousness worse. How in the world that would be the case escapes me, so asserting it as obvious seems like...too few words here to achieve any insight. I could be misunderstanding, so more words to clarify would be appreciated.
- thereticent 3y ago
  Explain a little more. I'm not understanding why the "potential impermanence" of death is a factor at all, much less why that potential impermanence is corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. To me it sounds like you're claiming that it makes us nervous that death might not last, and somehow realizing that being alive in the first place being improbable makes that nervousness worse. How in the world that would be the case escapes me, so asserting it as obvious seems like...too few words here to achieve any insight. I could be misunderstanding, so more words to clarify would be appreciated.
  - cupcakecommons 3y ago
    The concept of infinite rebirth and suffering at varying degrees of consciousness is much more threatening than the concept of having a single conscious existence bookended by stable nothingness. Stable nothingness is just modern-day materialist heaven. It's a coping mechanism that relies on your currently inexplicable conscious node of existence being the first and last across infinity/eternity.
haltist 3y ago
[dead]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wazoox 3y ago
“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” Mark Twain
- fortran77 3y ago
  Twain never said that. There's a similar quote in his _Autobiography_ but it doesn't really say the same thing. > We are so high that we do not have to explain anything to anybody, either in this world or in the next. Annihilation has no terrors for me, because I have already tried it before I was born–a hundred million years–and I have suffered more in an hour, in this life, than I remember to have suffered in the whole hundred million years put together. Look at his Autobiography for more context.
  - wslh 3y ago
    This is a good Internet archeology challenge. I quickly tried on Google [books] and ChatGPT. ChatGPT says that oldest misattribution it finds is from Richard Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" [1]. I retried on Google Books using quotes around a sentence and it finds [2] and [3]. I don't have access to these so I cannot check, if some can we could clarify part of the mistery. Project Gutenberg on Mark Twain [4]? DDG find the oldest attributed to Mark Twain in 2004 [5]. Trying [1] https://www.docdroid.net/XGv3aLm/the-god-delusion-pdf https://www.docdroid.net/XGv3aLm/the-god-delusion-pdf [2] https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/Mark_Twain_on_Religion/oIqMKvyxsGcC?hl=en https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/Mark_Twain_on_Religi... (Mark Twain 1906/2007 based on page results) [3] https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/The_Five_Boons_of_Life/ARHGDAEACAAJ?hl=en https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/The_Five_Boons_of_Li... (1902) (checked in Kindle search and it is not there, Google failed!). [4] https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/53 https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/53 trying site:gutenberg.org "I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born" doesn't give any result. [5] https://sorcerers.net/community/threads/high-level-abilities.23918/ https://sorcerers.net/community/threads/high-level-abilities...
  - Ntrails 3y ago
    I am not convinced that is a significantly different meaning? The true quote certainly has more depth and nuance around the hardship of living. But GP feels like a tolerable para-phrase to me
wjb3 3y ago
If we accept Nagel's perspective that death may not inherently be harmful to the individual who dies, how might this philosophy alter our societal or personal rituals around death, such as funerals or memorials?
- dash2 3y ago
  That's not his perspective.
fargle 3y ago
damnit. i though this was about TCP algorithms...

36 points by wjb3 3y ago

ngvrnd 3y ago

[flagged]

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
thereticent 3y ago
What seems unlikely? This is a whole essay addressing various ways of reasoning about the value of death to a person. I'm feeling frustrated that the engagement with this kind of content on HN is bald and unclear assertion. (This is not directed solely to you, but also to the other commenter so far).
- bongodongobob 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - kikokikokiko 3y ago
    It's not that philosophy is dumb. It's just that it's useless. Nobody has any clue about what the fuck are we doing here or if there is any reason to it at all, so philosophy in the end is just a debate about the gender of the angels. It's a waste of time, and mocking/ignoring it is the most reasonable attitude one can have.
    - rstefanic 3y ago
      > It's not that philosophy is dumb. It's just that it's useless. If I take a moment and think through that statement, I highly doubt you even believe this. And if it is sincere, then it just reinforces the point of the person that you were replying to. Do you think logic is useless? What about ethics and politics? What counts as science? What counts as knowledge? These are all philosophical inquiries. Even your statement that it's "useless" is a philosophical judgement. What makes something "useful" and not a waste of time? I guess you can make the argument that certain fields within philosophy are useless, but at this point, you're already doing philosophy again. You can try and ignore philosophy, but you're not going to avoid doing it. At worse, you'll just be doing it poorly.
    - dang 3y ago
      "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - dang 3y ago
    "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." It's reliably a marker of bad comments and worse threads. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dang 3y ago
Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.

cupcakecommons 3y ago

Death is only scary because of its potential impermanence corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. Being afraid of permanent death makes about as much sense as being afraid of going to sleep. Lots of words here for very little insight.

layer8 3y ago
Like most if not all emotions, fear of death makes a lot of sense evolutionarily. That’s why it’s an integral part of us humans. It’s an interesting question if that would be different if death wasn’t necessarily permanent.
thereticent 3y ago
Explain a little more. I'm not understanding why the "potential impermanence" of death is a factor at all, much less why that potential impermanence is corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. To me it sounds like you're claiming that it makes us nervous that death might not last, and somehow realizing that being alive in the first place being improbable makes that nervousness worse. How in the world that would be the case escapes me, so asserting it as obvious seems like...too few words here to achieve any insight. I could be misunderstanding, so more words to clarify would be appreciated.
thereticent 3y ago
Explain a little more. I'm not understanding why the "potential impermanence" of death is a factor at all, much less why that potential impermanence is corroborated by the probability of existing in the first place. To me it sounds like you're claiming that it makes us nervous that death might not last, and somehow realizing that being alive in the first place being improbable makes that nervousness worse. How in the world that would be the case escapes me, so asserting it as obvious seems like...too few words here to achieve any insight. I could be misunderstanding, so more words to clarify would be appreciated.
- cupcakecommons 3y ago
  The concept of infinite rebirth and suffering at varying degrees of consciousness is much more threatening than the concept of having a single conscious existence bookended by stable nothingness. Stable nothingness is just modern-day materialist heaven. It's a coping mechanism that relies on your currently inexplicable conscious node of existence being the first and last across infinity/eternity.

haltist 3y ago

[dead]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

wazoox 3y ago

“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” Mark Twain

fortran77 3y ago
Twain never said that. There's a similar quote in his _Autobiography_ but it doesn't really say the same thing. > We are so high that we do not have to explain anything to anybody, either in this world or in the next. Annihilation has no terrors for me, because I have already tried it before I was born–a hundred million years–and I have suffered more in an hour, in this life, than I remember to have suffered in the whole hundred million years put together. Look at his Autobiography for more context.
- wslh 3y ago
  This is a good Internet archeology challenge. I quickly tried on Google [books] and ChatGPT. ChatGPT says that oldest misattribution it finds is from Richard Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" [1]. I retried on Google Books using quotes around a sentence and it finds [2] and [3]. I don't have access to these so I cannot check, if some can we could clarify part of the mistery. Project Gutenberg on Mark Twain [4]? DDG find the oldest attributed to Mark Twain in 2004 [5]. Trying [1] https://www.docdroid.net/XGv3aLm/the-god-delusion-pdf https://www.docdroid.net/XGv3aLm/the-god-delusion-pdf [2] https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/Mark_Twain_on_Religion/oIqMKvyxsGcC?hl=en https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/Mark_Twain_on_Religi... (Mark Twain 1906/2007 based on page results) [3] https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/The_Five_Boons_of_Life/ARHGDAEACAAJ?hl=en https://www.google.com.ar/books/edition/The_Five_Boons_of_Li... (1902) (checked in Kindle search and it is not there, Google failed!). [4] https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/53 https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/53 trying site:gutenberg.org "I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born" doesn't give any result. [5] https://sorcerers.net/community/threads/high-level-abilities.23918/ https://sorcerers.net/community/threads/high-level-abilities...
- Ntrails 3y ago
  I am not convinced that is a significantly different meaning? The true quote certainly has more depth and nuance around the hardship of living. But GP feels like a tolerable para-phrase to me

wjb3 3y ago

If we accept Nagel's perspective that death may not inherently be harmful to the individual who dies, how might this philosophy alter our societal or personal rituals around death, such as funerals or memorials?

dash2 3y ago
That's not his perspective.

fargle 3y ago

damnit. i though this was about TCP algorithms...