My wife passed this year from cancer. Looking back we had no idea how close we were to the end, and in the last few weeks her beautiful mind was influenced by the disease. I’m sure someone on HN is going through this at least adjacently and my recommendation is to not wait to the end to have important conversations. For those that aren’t going through this now, maybe for a little while live life like you are...it might inform your priorities and perspective.
My 17 year old daughter was already dealing with a life-altering chronic disease and losing her mom plus all of this pandemic bullshit has really made a mess. She broke down crying last night struggling over the idea of death and that everything seems to be pitted against her. It’s hard to know exactly what to say in those moments, maybe some of these words from a person at the doorstep will help her.
For what it’s worth we do have her seeing both a counselor and a psychiatrist but that only goes so far...at the end of the day it’s you and your thoughts staring at the ceiling while you’re trying to get to sleep for the 5am shift tomorrow.
Seeing your child dealing with loss is the hardest. In my case it overrode my ability to deal with my own grief. Eventually (glossing over the irrelevant details) he came out the other side, and is doing fine. And once I didn’t have to spend all my emotional energy on him I could look after myself.
Your daughter is 17 which may give you additional concern. My child was a few years younger but he missed all of that stressful middle-class “get the right classes, right prep and right scores”. It was simply not possible except a bit of going through the motions. But in the end none of that mattered and he ended up in a place where he probably would have been had he gone through those stressful gyrations. So my unsolicited advice is: if you can manage to support her in stepping off the treadmill and dealing with whatever is the highest priorities for her, she’ll probably ultimately be fine.
There are unfortunately no guarantees, but many people do make it to the other side, however horrible the path may be.
A friend of mine lost his wife a few months ago (she had really stepped up to help me). His three kids each reacted completely differently and I am amazed at his ability to accept the needs of each one.
>Seeing your child dealing with loss is the hardest. In my case it overrode my ability to deal with my own grief.
It really is the most difficult part of this process. If there's a silver lining it obliterated any remaining hubris I had over being able to explain the world to them. I do it when I can of course, I'm still dad, but I have also found a way to just be with them in the human experience.
Both of my girls are incredibly strong in their own ways. They are different, though, and are working through the process of recognizing those differences in each other and how it affects their response to grief and the world in general. My one remaining hope in life is that they find a way to strengthen their bond with each other and remain ride or die for the rest of their time on this plane.
> Looking back we had no idea how close we were to the end
This rings very true for me.
My dad died of brain cancer going on five years ago now.
He was diagnosed in 2014. They were clear the prognosis was not good. One or two years at best.
They removed the tumor as soon as they found it, and he returned basically to normal. There was a weird settling in of what it all meant and treatments that were meant to stall things a while.
But since the tumor was small, he was able to function and be basically his old self.
We had our first daughter in the fall of 2015. He was there to meet her. Everything felt like it was looking up.
Three weeks later, on my first day back to work, I got a call at 10:30. "The cancer is back." I took the day off.
At Christmas, he was definitely starting to act goofy and be more forgetful. We'd have to distract him so he didn't try to go plow the driveway or do things like that.
It became a question of "do we go up every weekend, or can we take this weekend off?"
And then at the beginning of February things started getting really bad and my mom moved him into a nursing home in town. That lasted for a little less than a week I think. Then it was clear this was the end.
So we came up in the middle of the week. Sat by his bedside for hours on end. Held his hand.
My dad had two things he'd always say about dying:
1. When someone comes to die, they need someone to hold their hand.
2. People need permission to die. Otherwise they will hang on way longer than they otherwise would.
So I held his hand for a couple days. And then on maybe the third evening, it became pretty clear he was deteriorating.
So I leaned over, kissed him on the head, told him that he'd done a great job raising me and my brother, and that it was okay and we'd be here till the end.
And then we watched him die. I think it was about 4am when he finally passed.
I never remember what day it was, but I do remember that Lent had just started and he died the morning of Transfiguration Sunday. Which the internet tells me was Feb 7, 2016.
There's a Deathcab for Cutie song, "Love is watching someone die." It's the truth. You have to love someone a lot to be there through that.
Anyway, to come back around, it all just went so much faster than you think it would. Especially towards the end.
It took a little over a month for "Dad's acting funny again" to turn into "Dad died last night".
Thanks for sharing this. When you're in the midst of everything it's important to temper the hope of healing with the reality that if that doesn't come you're in a very special, very limited window of time.
>2. People need permission to die. Otherwise they will hang on way longer than they otherwise would.
I wrote about this elsewhere, but my wife on a couple of occasions said 'I think it's time for you to let me go.' I didn't really understand what she meant by that. She was incredibly stoic and was happy to leave the words for me to interpret. I was still so wrapped up in trying to find a way out that I couldn't conceive of just letting go...it felt truly like those scenes in a movie where someone is hanging off of a building and your grip is the only thing keeping them alive. After she passed, her words gained new meaning to me and this was part of it. Permission to go, and permission to talk about the life that comes afterwards. Not figuring this out in time to alleviate some of her pain and let her share her dreams about the future without her is one of my biggest regrets.
> > Looking back we had no idea how close we were to the end
Happened to me as well, on several occasions.
My dad passed away just before New Year a few months ago. At the time I thought him going to hospital was going to be yet another scare, and he should just get his act together and eat properly and exercise. Never got around to it, and his last words were some gibberish.
I felt like maybe there should have been proper last words, but looking back there were. His terminal stage had actually started a few years before, at a bypass surgery. At the time he told me that if the surgery didn't work, he'd be happy to die. Life had treated him just fine, no big issues with anyone to report. Happy with having three kids and a couple of grandchildren. Nothing left to do.
And so the next three years passed with him not doing anything the doctors had told him to do, and we got used to periodic ambulance calls (heart attacks, blood sugar incidents). Somehow he made his life summary come true, nothing more to do.
On another occasion, one of my high school classmates passed away from cancer at 29. I knew he'd had it before, but then it seemed to pass, and being young I thought it wasn't a huge problem because he seemed chipper and full of zest. He had a girlfriend and a career. When it came back I figured I'd drop by to see him, but in a few weeks on my holiday. Ended up being sooner, for his funeral.
This utterly breaks my heart. I'm so sorry for your loss.
I too lost my mother to cancer and was there the morning I noticed hear breathing change and could tell she was about to leave.
It's hard to fathom when someone that raised you suddenly leaves your life. To this day I remember her last moments and my own wailing at both the moment she passed and when I crumpled to my knees as she was buried.
> It took a little over a month for "Dad's acting funny again" to turn into "Dad died last night".
I lost my mother from lung cancer so I can relate.
My dad on the other hand died without notice. I got a message on my phone one day when I was at work. It was a cop from my father's town. They didn't tell me why they were calling, but I knew something happened to my father because he was living on the edge. I took the day off and went home to call them back. He died a few days before at his home.
He was too young to die, but I think it was the best possible death, for him and for us. We didn't have a chance to "say good bye", but it doesn't really matter in the end.
The worst part of dying is anticipating death. I wish I could die accidentally.
I agree. I got a similar call that my dad was killed at work when I was in my early 20s. Due to the circumstances I'm not convinced it wasn't intentional on his part, and in some odd ways I get a bit of relief from that. It was devastating to me, but watching my wife and the mother of my children go through a tortuous 26 months of treatments, unrelenting pain, cycles of hope and despair, various indignities and ultimately passing in a confused state was orders of magnitude worse.
Similarly, the despair and agony is really what hit me most. Last autumn, my father began experiencing occasional cramps in one leg after a regular 75k bike ride. During the following month, the pain gradually spread throughout his body and increased in frequency, seemingly for no apparent reason, based on medical tests and scans. He slowly stopped eating as his body was being consumed day and night: he lost healthy weight at a rate of one pound per day. As muscle weakness spread and as he lost his faculty to walk, he grew steadily delirious with pain and lack of sleep. By the 1st of December, he was in hospital full time undergoing a barrage of tests to no avail; a diagnosis of ALS was given mid-month. During the following week, he spoke his last words. In the throes of his body collapsing, he would tear out IV and catheter. At the rate at which his situation was deteriorating, feeding tube and intubation coupled with restraints appeared cruel. He passed before the end of the year.
"Looking back we had no idea how close we were to the end"
This happened to me as well. My brother passed at age 47 in 2013. He was initially diagnosed with stage 2 colon cancer and things seemed to be going alright for about a year.
The issue was that the tumor was near a major blood vessel and surgery failed because they were afraid he would bleed to death.
Even after this failed surgery, we had hope with some experimental treatments. He lasted another year.
After a couple of rounds of chemo, he went from bad to worse within a couple of weeks. I had never experienced death like this before and it all came a a shock to me how quickly he passed away.
The worst part is that he fought the idea of death to the very end (I'm sure we all do). There were no plans for his one-man successful business and his wife had to get all of his passwords for important accounts when he was delirious from all of the drugs in his system and nearly on his death bed. He truly thought he would beat it.
The aftermath was like a bomb went off in our family.
His wife begged me to help her with his business on the day of the funeral. I realized he had been neglecting customers for 6 months+ (this is completely understandable, given his condition) and they were screaming for their money back. I spent many weeks/weekends/long nights cleaning up the business and getting the business back to a reasonable level, gaining back customers that would have been lost. This was all for free, to help her (and his kids) out. I explained to her that future work would not be free.
I also had to help her return all kinds of electronics that he bought while he was on chemo drugs. He managed to rack up $50,000 in bills because he would forget that he ordered something..and order 10 of them.
To this day, I'm not sure how she didn't notice all of these amazon packages coming to the door and thinking nothing of it.
After this was done, I told his wife that if she wanted me to continue with this business arrangement, I would need to be a partner in the business. She not only didn't want to do this, but told me I only 'answered emails' and didn't do any actual work, which was clearly not true.
She wanted to give me a free cell phone and pay me around $10/hour as compensation for future work. It was also explained that she had contacted a lawyer and it was stressed that all of the intellectual property from the business was not mine. Kind of strange to me to already assume I'm going to steal intellectual property from you when I just saved you many thousands of dollars and your business..for free.
At this point you may be thinking she's just naive and may not understand the work involved. She worked in the computer industry for a decade. This is how she met my brother. She understands the work it takes to run his business and only wanted to take advantage of me.
As an aside, my brothers business involves: tech support, software development of multiple products in at least 3 languages, and knowing the business. I have the ability do do all three, since I have been in the software/tech industry for the past 2 decades and have owned multiple successful companies. Him and I were very close and I had lots of knowledge about his business and what it entailed. We had ongoing tech discussions through email/chats/in-person for many years.
He was the one that bought me my first computer and was my mentor.
4 months later, she emailed me a contract with a proposal. I would get 5% of the profits for working on it full-time and her kids would own 100% of the business. This was a slap in my face and I declined the offer.
With the declining profits in the business, this would have been like working at
The problem is that I would need to work on it full-time to actually save it from failure. If I signed the contract, only worked on it part-time, and it failed, I would be blamed. I also don't like to half-ass anything...especially when it comes to running a business.
She then proceeded to get anyone she could find to work on the business for free and started creating a wedge in my immediate family by spreading false information about the situation. She ended up roping in one of his clients, who had become a friend, to answer all emails for free.
She describes him as a 'good, christian, man'. The funny part is that she was never that religious..and I've known her for 25 years. One of her greatest traits is the ability to manipulate people. All of her friends are people that can do things for her. If she can't use you for something, you are cast off and ignored. She especially likes networking with anyone that has lots of money.
Fast forward to 2020 and the website is in terrible shape. A 7+ year out-of-date website that keeps getting hacked and badly mis-configured DNS records. I told her how to fix these on the first day, but my advice was ignored. I can only imagine how insecure the actual product is, since there have been no updates in all this time.
I also found out my other brother has been helping her for free and outright lying to me about it. I overheard a conversation a couple of days ago that they wanted to keep secret from me. He also has no idea what he's doing and badly butchered the site...but the price for his services is perfect (free).
I just wish my brother would have admit to himself that he may die and specifically write out his wishes for the business in his will. I think it would have prevented this entire situation.
I should probably thank him. It showed me that his wife is still the evil, conniving woman that she was many years ago and that she never really changed..she only got better at hiding it before he died.
But there's now these lingering issues at all family gatherings.
I now own two successful companies. I don't think I would have ever gotten to this level of success, even with a partnership in my brother's company and a business partner that would only fight me on every important decision.
Thanks for sharing your personal story. I think it’s important for everyone to realize that we are all human. Nothing more, nothing less. The world has become super competitive to the point that we all seem to forget this simple fact.
I have found that in my own times of trouble and profound sadness that two books have helped me cope. The first one, which is admittedly hard to read when you are very close to a loss (better to inculcate yourself with it ahead of time if possible) is the Enchiridion of Epictetus [1]. The second is Siddhartha by Herman Hesse. What works for me will probably not work for you but I thought sharing my experiences with you might open a path of exploration.
You will overcome this. Your child will too. On a long enough timeline even the most profound grief reduces to an instance. Be well my friend.
This is where faith steps in... There is wisdom in the ages that will help you and your daughter. Try and find a pathway of peace and guidance from the universe's deep pool of human experiences.
Agree. Not a religious person myself, but there are times in life when there are no answers, nothing that anyone can do, when fate is completely outside anyone's control.
When everything else fails, you have left only your strength of will against reason. And spirituality may be the only thing to give you that strength.
for me personally - the multiple times in my life when i have been in the process of putting someone in the ground - this kind of comment was right at the top of the list of the least helpful things people said.
Appropriate for some people, irrelevant or worse for others. I know you mean well and don’t intend to harsh on you, but I think your statement could much better have started “this is where religion might offer some solace”.
Every person has to make a different journey, and no tool is appropriate to everyone.
I am not religious. Never mentioned religion. Only faith and the deep pool of human experiences shared by all people. The fact that you cannot separate the two, is a problem for you and you alone to resolve. Think outside your parameters and you might find new knowledge and growth
I agree, I just need to recalibrate my perspective. There are certainly those that have gone through this and worse, and faith has helped them and their loved ones.
My girls were raised Christian and I and my wife practiced and professed that faith our entire relationship. I haven't given up on the faith but I am so profoundly disappointed in the modern church that I need to go back to the root of it all and see how much it still resonates.
It sounds like you are disappointed in what people who are in the modern church, publicly speaking that you have access to, are saying. There will obviously be an availability bias on how we each perceive the "modern church".
If you don't believe in what the Bible says, then disregard everything below.
Try reading the Bible. As a whole. And if you have, do it again. Don't let individual versus taken out of context influence major decisions. Know who wrote each chapter (if we know that), who they were writing to, and why they wrote that chapter to put everything in context. I found I was reading too fast and missing major parts. Also translation makes a big deal - some words just don't translate properly - and a good Bible will have footnotes to explain the original word. There are lots of plans out there.
Then, I think, you will realize that what those in the modern church you are referencing are saying should disappoint all of us... and it's not in alignment with the Bible and Jesus' teachings, and you can see where they don't align. Not all churches are that way. Anyways go to the source (if you haven't already).
Have you been to a Unitarian Church? They tend to do away with a lot of the politics and dogma and stick to the core and have better camaraderie than any other church I've been to. I'm an agnostic, but I'm always up for hanging out with cool, chill people. I mean if you're actually a believer and such it might be cool. Bahai meetings were the only other one I've been to that rivaled. They're the polar opposite of the BS laden evangelical movement trying to bring in politics and money to everything.
I'm not sure how to interpret what you have written but assuming good faith - there are things and states worse than death, particularly when analyzed from the point of view of the individual. It is widely considered humane to terminate the life of a suffering animal when no hope of recovery is possible. Such a thing could even be considered an act of love. Depending on a deeper analysis of free will and religion it is feasible that a God is both capable of controlling your death and simultaneously loving you. I'm not a serious believer so I will leave the free will discussion and points of doctrine to others.
thinking on something outside yourself is helpful, even empirically. You might not agree with the specific flavour, but even something as bare and nonspiritual as Seneca can help.
Having a mental structure either exogenously adopted or of one's own construction to apply rationality to temporarily irrational losses seemingly is a very good thing for ones mental well-being. I've found great comfort in Epictetus and in the Bible although I follow neither dogmatically.
I'm sorry to hear of your family's struggles. Your advice is spot on and something I discovered during a 10-day Vipassana retreat. I wish I could say something to help your daughter or you. Maybe that beauty and happiness are possible in the smallest of everyday things even as we deal with horrific pain. It gets better somehow.
I just want to say I'm really sorry for everything you're going through. Life sucks overall right now so I can't imagine adding what you and your family are going through. I assume you and your daughter have a good relationship based on the situation but, if not, I'd try to be as vulnerable with each other as you can manage. It'll really help turn you guys into support structures for each other which is really helpful when things are as rough as they are right now.
Thank you for the kind thoughts and words, and I totally agree with your recommendation. It’s going to take some time, but we’re moving in the right direction.
As someone without much of a relationship with my father, it really makes me really glad to see another father with a child who loves their dad enough to cry to them.
It sounds like you've been taking a lot of care of others. I don't see anyone else mentioning this in replies, but please make sure you're taking good care of yourself, too. If you haven't in a while and are able to, consider getting a good meal, taking a night off, or just doing something you enjoy doing for a couple days.
Thanks buddy. Our relationship is good but on a few occasions I've heard each of them refer to it as some variation of distant. It breaks my heart because even if I did everything again I don't really know how I would fix it. It's possible I tried too hard to let them find their own way without undue influence from me, maybe a little bit of both is good there. I don't know, but if they choose to have their own kids I'm going to apply whatever I have learned along the way to be the best damn grandpa I can be.
Appreciate the well wishes. I am on a road of trying to take better care of myself as well, hopefully they will see that and be encouraged that the old man is here for the long haul.
This made me cry, very suddenly and unexpectedly. I know it will probably not mean anything tangible but I am so sorry for your loss. I hope you and your daughter are able to come out of this ordeal stronger than you went in.
She was diagnosed and was dead with in a year. But she experienced symptoms for at least a year before. For about 1.5 years I don't think she really understood much of what we said to her, and of course the last 6 months she was basically a child.
Near the end I told her I loved her and she was a great mom, but I really should have told her that 2 years before. Its one of my biggest regrets.
My grandfather says this, and meets his age with a reverent smile. It's so unburdening to embrace age. The fear of it is encompassing and I feel it on the edge of my mind at times.
But it is _so_ incredibly liberating to meet it with a warm smile and acceptance.
Age is not a punishment, it's a gift, a privilege, to carry the memories we have and to wear our lives on our face like we're able to.
”But everybody dies, and there will always be places and experiences missing from anyone’s life – the world has too much beauty and adventure for one person to see.”
I remember precisely when I had this particular epiphany. I was 12 years old, in love with books, and thanks to my parents who had signed a form, I had just gotten my first library card for the real (read: non-kiddie) section of the public library. Awed by the sheer number of tall bookshelves, intoxicated by the library smell and my newfound source of knowledge, I asked the librarian how many books they had, she said more than 100,000. I was duly impressed. But then I started thinking, and did some arithmetic on a piece of scrap paper.
And I realized that even if I read one book a day for the rest of my life, I would only be able to read a fraction of all the books on the shelves. Right there in the same room with me was provably unattainable knowledge. I could decide to read any book, but I could not read all of them. If I decided to read this book, then that other book would remain forever unread. Years before I would be able to put the words on it, I had stumbled upon a kind of incompleteness theorem, and I started to understand how small one's life actually is. This thought never left me.
"Meditating on death" and "premeditation of future ills" is a big theme in Stoicism (and the broader 'Hellenistic Philosophy'). Seneca's letters have many different exhortations on "preparing for death". Some choice quotes:
• "Many people grasp and hold on to life, like those caught by a flash flood who grasp at weeds and brambles. Most are tossed about between the fear of death and the torments of life: they do not want to live but do not know how to die. Cast off your solicitude for life, then, and in doing so make life enjoyable for yourself. No good thing benefits us while we have it unless we are mentally prepared for the loss of it." — Seneca
• "Epicurus says 'It is a fine thing to learn death thoroughly.' Perhaps you think it is a waste of time to learn something you will need to use only once. But that is the very reason we ought to rehearse: if we cannot test whether we know it, we should be learning it always." — Seneca riffing on Epicurus (not to be confused with Epictetus, a Stoic; he even has a discourse titled "Against Epicurus")
• "As the water clock does not empty out its last drop only but also whatever dripped through it before, so our last hour of existence is not the only time we die but just the only time we finish dying. Death is not one event; the death that takes us is our last." — Seneca
• "Years are not given out by quota. There's no way to know the point where death lies waiting for you, you must wait for death at every point." — Seneca
• "Let death be before your eyes every day, and you will never have a base thought or an excessive desire." — Marcus Aurelius
• "The torment we feel comes about through our own agency, because we become alarmed when we believe that death is close at hand. But isn't it close to everyone, ready in place and every moment?" — Seneca
• "Think about arranging the present as best as you can, with serene mind. All else is carried away as by a river." — Horace
•••
Sources for quotations: Seneca's 'Letters on Ethics' (full set of letters, excellently translated by Graver and Long); the others are from 'What is Ancient Philosophy?' by Pierre Hadot.
It's a well known psychological phenomenon though. Losing a given sum of money is more painful than earning that same amount. if you find a $20 banknote on the sidewalk, you wont be as happy as the guy who lost lost it is pissed off.
Did you note that the OP said it is a well known psychological phenomenon and not some utopian enlightened state that most of us can only aspire to attain?
And fwiw, Schopenhauer knew about Buddhism very well and talks about it in length in his essays on pessimism. What he means by attachment here is in fact, the Buddhist equivalent of craving. What you own can add to your vanity, but it is what you do not have or are longing for(in this case more money) that shows your true inclination, which Schopenhauer describes as worth. It does not mean that money has no worth, it means that the money that you already own has way less worth than what you don't. Aphorisms are pithy for a precise reason ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You seem confused. The "utopian enlightened state" as you weirdly mischaracterize it is about overcoming the well known psychological phenomenon.
You wouldn't call every non-instinctive skill (from reading to playing piano to shooting a basketball) that you learn in life a "utopian enlightened state", would you?
It is indeed a way to overcome the "well known psychological phenomenon", and also I wouldn't call reading or playing piano as non-instinctive or for that matter a "utopian enlightened state". My retort was more towards the mischaracterization of a pithy quote.
And I go to the Buddha if I want to know about Buddhism. Schopenhauer did not understand the difference between the Hindu's denial of self and the Buddha's idea of "not self".
> So if I never loose my money it is worthless! Ha!
Maybe not but, you probably had to earn it in the first place and that is why you know its value.
I think if you were born rich and never had to worry about money in an existential way, then you would not really know the value of it. Not even from observing the pain of others. I think the only way is to really experience it first hand.
Even if a rich person tried to "simulate" it by not allowing themselves to spend more than x amount of money for say a month or something it still would not be the same. At all. Because no matter how bad that month would be, they still know all along that it's not a real threat and that the money is right there waiting for them.
But if you had to go through a lot of real pain, then you know the real value of money. I wonder, however, if with time we would forget still. I dunno, I have never been wealthy yet.
"But if you had to go through a lot of real pain, then you know the real value of money. "
The more pain and suffering I have the more I realize money is not important at all and that money might be the cause of most of the pain and suffering in the world.
(Is that not a religious soul left on the internet?)
I think you're being down voted because it appears you're missing the point that in certain societies, without money you can not feed yourself or your family, let alone be sitting having this discussion on Hacker News.
Money is important if you want a roof over your head, your children to have uniform for school and food on the table. If you want to be able to spend time with them rather than working 3 jobs to pay your rent, or put fuel in the car you drive to work, lest you have to catch the bus and spend even less time with them.
If you're fortunate enough to live where you don't need money for these things, I'm happy for you, if you're not turn you either have more money than these people do, or you're otherwise looked after.
When people get philosophical about this, they are generally trying to avoid materialism and thus not thinking in the terms I am about to use, but I wonder how investment fits in with that attitude.
From one perspective your money can sit idle in a brokerage account, from another it is put to use by someone else.
You could take out capital gains and dividends, and spend them, leaving your starting balance the same. That starting balance could continue making you money.
In other words there are ways to imagine money never spent, sitting in an account, that isn't worthless.
Schopenhauer studied Hindu and Buddhist philosophy - of course he was aware how our attachments determine our value system and lead to suffering. Your comment is just a re-statement of the same truth. Our attachment to things are determined by the subjective weight of their loss.
"Your rude attitude" Ha! You should meet a monk sometime? Wrong audience, yes. Rude? Ha! So what! It exposes the people who are still attached to their ego.
If you do not understand it is just you who does not understand. Misinterpretation? No, just a deeper understanding.
Sorry I interrupted the death porn. I will go now.
Having just turned 31 this hits home. I appreciate the positivity he could find in the twilight of his days. I can't help but feel I may lack the courage to face death the same way. His focus on gratitude really does seem to match what I understand to be the best way to find joy in the often bleak life we find ourselves in. There is almost always someone or something to appreciate in our lives.
I prefer to assume people may lie for everything but not for their soon to be happening death. If they fool me, I accept the consequences. The opposite, as in being cynical for even these kind of things, is much scarier and unhealthy for my mental state.
My great fear is not dying but leaving the people behind who depend on me.
I mean as the only earning member of my family the scariest post part about dying is what will happen to family.
I don't have a big life insurance and not a lot of savings. So it gives me chills that my wife and daughter will have to fend for themselves or live a lesser life should I cease to exist suddenly one day.
I really hope you can get enough life insurance for cheap, it will set your mind at ease. https://www.zanderins.com. The rule I've heard is get 10-12 times your income. If you're making 60k/year, that's 600,000 - 720,000 in insurance, which for a young-ish healthy-ish person is cheaper than most people expect.
rawls' social utility theory stated that by maximizing the welfare of the worst-off person, you improve all of society; at the time i learned it it seemed like a strange idea.
but then i thought: every moment in your life can be valued according to how much life you have ahead of it. the present moment is the most valuable; and the very last moment, the least -- you have nothing ahead of it. i thought: if you live your life such that the last moment, which is the least valuable in that sense, is as good as possible -- perhaps that would improve the totality of the rest of your life.
this has all been covered by the buddhist concepts on this thread but i thought it was interesting that we can come to this same idea somewhat independently. (maybe rawls was inspired by buddhism? i don't know.)
That "live today as though it's your last" was too dark for me. Fatalistic or something. To get out of my rut, I needed something forward facing, optimistic.
I eventually settled on "live every day as if it's your first." More of "new mind" mentality. I needed something that emphasized awe, joy, wonder, discovery. Vs the addict's group therapy cliche "today is the first day of the rest of your life."
FWIW, my first brush with death was 34 years ago. Having done the bereavement cycle a few too many times kinda moots the exercise. Needs to be done. But it's just a stepping stone.
highly relevant: M. Scott Peck "The Road less Traveled", in a nutshell the relationship to ourselves is what gives us the ability to be in a fulfilling relationship with others. I wanted to emphasize this because too many I know (including my former self) would rather be with somebody else ("to fulfill them or -worse- "make them complete") than develop a good relationship with our "self" first.
I've never really liked platitudes like "family is everything" and "nothing matters without relationships" -- they don't seem to come from a good place. People who lack these things may enjoy their lives every bit as much, what's the point of denigrating their life?
Every time it is me that ends up losing interest in the people around me. At some point I decided to recognize that if I was not going to put in the effort to build relationships then there was no sense in putting myself down for not having them built up later. But at the same time when I meet new people, no matter how many things we both like, if they are not purposefully inviting me over then I will stop caring about them and return to having no friendships again. That is entirely on me.
It isn't like they are bad people, but there are other things I will inevitably end up gravitating to instead.
But it isn't like I'm alone because I have other things to occupy my time. There are times that I did wish I had other friendships but I end up putting those feelings aside when I start working on something. For better or worse I am lucky to be able to say this. Some artists say they can only survive and keep working by being able to be alone for extended periods of time.
When I don't get too attached to anyone the pain of losing them doesn't really come. And the people I do care about I've actually made miserable and angry by the number of times I've brought up that I am going to die someday and that I'm trying to live in the moment with them and acknowledge the transience of being alive with them. At some point continuing to acknowledge the fact that being alive and having known them is a miracle in front of them is counterproductive, and in the end it probably doesn't make dying any less painful.
After doing all that I don't understand what else I can possibly do but continue being alive.
It's not the idea itself which seems to me absurd, it's the process - let's take something from abstract mathematical field and apply it on a vaguely "topologically" similar subjective experience and think that "it's proven by math".
Topological similarities can be meaningful as in they often provide great source of inspiration.
However, it's just an inspiration and it must be proven in its newly applied field - proof in context of category theory is not valid in the context of inter-personal relations.
For what it's worth, you asserted above that you are not rude, but telling a stranger they sound like a sociopath is generally considered rude. It may genuinely be that you have transcended social norms, but the rest of us haven't, and I'm afraid you're dealing with the rest of us!
Perhaps that serves to illustrate why it is rude. If that doesn't help, then just remember that it is. Good manners don't always need to make sense to you, sometimes they only make sense to other people.
“All that is mine, beloved and pleasing, will become otherwise and will become separated from me”— Siddhartha Gautama.
As a Buddhist we do “contemplation of death” meditation on a regular basis. It involves imagining our last few hours on our deathbed. It is a wonderful exercise to help put things in context. It makes you behave differently towards people you meet, even strangers.
Sometimes, when I talk to my 4 year old son, I imagine how we will have our last goodbye talk on my death bed. How we will both know that this is the last moment together, how we both will be mourning.
It makes me incredibly sad, and, at the same time it helps me to make better decisions in life. Choosing spending time with him instead of surfing the web for no reason for example.
In my sect of Buddhism, we don't do "contemplation of death" meditation. What we are taught is to consider our last moment before death, so we can approach it (which is the beginning of our existence in death) in the proper way. And that, in my understanding, boils down to establishing the correct foundation during our life.
I meditate regularly, but I think this type of exercise is misguided and betrays the body-denying/denigrating bias that can be often found in religious traditions world-wide. It encourages an ignorant attitude towards the body: instead of contemplating the miracles of the muscular system, see it as amorphous flesh. Amplify the spurious association of the skeleton with the malnourished body it resembles, instead of marveling at the ingenious way it serves it's (many) purposes, and so on.
I generally agree with you that a lot of lineages, particularly the Theravada derived ones here in the west, might go overboard with body denial practices. The meditations from the Satipatthana sutra are great, but I feel like you can get caught in trying to prove everything is suffering if you don’t have enough grounding in other parts of Buddhist teachings because of them. Like all of the sutras it can point you in a direction, but we shouldn’t be caught up in them.
Personally, in my meditation practice, it was completely transformed and deepened when I began a dedicated asana practice and focused on giving my body what it needs to be strong and in touch with what it is saying.
That's like saying you are not your car; while you're driving the distinction is less important than keeping between the lines and watching for pedestrians.
I am a Daoist like everyone else is a Gravitist. You all believe gravity because you feel it work and it was explained and named to you. You feel Daoism and Buddhism work as well but no one has explained to to you.
… I don't know how to respond. Mu, I guess? As I see it, you are mixing several senses of the word "to be", and the resulting question is meaningless.
The pattern of my mind is physically instantiated (as all the ten thousand things are), and it happens to be so instantiated on a brain. That brain is housed in a body. The pattern can direct the shape and properties of the body only to a limited extent: there are heavy restrictions which happen to constrain the power that pattern (or rather, its particular instantiation on this particular brain) has over the body. (We call these restrictions "biology".) I could no more order my body to become immortal than I could order the ocean waves to stand still: they are both governed by the same laws of physics over which I have almost no control. I could probably make my body immortal by some sufficiently clever manipulation of the world (possibly involving waves hands wildly nanobots), but the brain did not come pre-packaged with high-fidelity fine-grained control over its environment; the pattern can interact with the world only by flapping around bits of meat, and these are a very blunt instrument, highly unsuitable for difficult tasks like "reverse entropy in this region of space".
"And if I think everything belongs to me,
How wrong I'll be, none of us have anything."
— Broadcast
Not trying to be a jackass. I think this short, sweet, spiritual song about the material world and after is poignant. All the more bittersweet considering the untimely death of the singer.
Sounds similar to how the stoics spend time contemplating the absolute worst thing they can imagine happening because then anything after that is an improvement.
On the opposite, you'll appreciate those small moments more because this might be the last moment you have. Reminding yourself of death often keeps you from taking life for granted.
I think Americans hide from death too much. We try to put boxes around it. I say this as one. I envy cultures where they're more open and public about it. I'l say that New Orleans does something right. They have parade parties when a loved one dies.
I'm the same age and not at all at peace with my mortality - the dominant feeling being envy of those who get to live after my death.
If I wrote a book with ghosts, zombies or other undead I would give the antagonists this as their reasons for hating the living.
Anyway that point about vulnerability is spot on. When I hug my SO I often reflexively blurt something among the lines of "softness is important", but what I really mean by that is vulnerability is important - this is something I had to learn from her and it's what helped me improve myself as a person.
I think: lose enough ego and entitlement, and you can not only find peace with death but even see it as a truly "happy ending" given the wondrous experiences of the uncountable people that will come after you (and what a petty, selfish distinction whose experiences those are is).
But that's not easy. It seems to take years of thinking about death almost daily and thinking about space and time[0] and history and stuff. And maybe psychedelics, although I never tried those yet.
Imagine that there's some form of brain time anomaly when you die, where your last moment stretches and you live on in a dream, with the dreams during your life being the test runs.
I have not seen a reason to think cryonics will work at all.
Even if we actually do find a way to restore frozen near-death people to life, you'd better write a heck of a pitch as to why future humans should spend resources on reviving and healing you.
Never mind all the resources being spent on keeping you properly frozen all that time.
That's all assuming the company running your freezer doesn't just go belly-up after ninety years, leaving you to thaw and rot after all that expense was dumped into keeping your now-corpse uselessly preserved for decades.
Cryonics actually plays the role so many atheists believe religion plays for the religious - comfort in the face of The End that is inevitably coming to you.
It is false hope, a tool to help you deceive yourself into thinking you can defeat death.
Why would they not want to revive you? How awesome would it be, if we could revive someone who lived around the year 1500, 1000 or even 0? I expect people in the year 3000 (if there are still people around and if they have it relatively good) would see it equally when looking to the year 2000.
I would be much more interested in what a tenth century peasant had to say considering all the famous ones were the only ones whose perspectives we get to see.
The historical gaps concern the other 90% of the population.
The point still applies though. After you've revived 4 or 5 peasants, you've probably gotten most of the information you were interested in. And now you have 4 or 5 peasants who are poorly adjusted to the world they now find themselves in, and you have to take care of them for a long time. How many would you revive?
I'd be worried some rich psychopath (actually, probably an AI) would resurrect people and put them into a torture dungeon for eternity.
Imagine never being able to die. Only suffer.
No mouth, must scream vibes.
Who knows what the future holds.
But in the remote chance this is what the future holds, the AI may not even need your body. It might be able to simulate you up to the moment of your death. Or find some quirk of physics and pull you forward in time. To suffer forever.
Or maybe it's benevolent and lets us live in an eternity of bliss?
Maybe it gets bored and does this for all humans that ever lived. There might be some arbitrary criteria or some random number generator it uses to decide your fate.
I find all of this much more compelling than religion's perspective of the afterlife.
Take that, Basilisk. My machination is worse (or better).
You really ought to read I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream. The author has already thought of basically the same thing and written a rather compelling yet disturbing short story about. In 1967, no less.
But if we're going to give unfathomable power to such an AI, it's not much more of a leap to give it the ability to resurrect people from the past and subject them to whatever it desires.
Taking it even one step further and comparing it to the Simulation Hypothesis [1], perhaps we're already there. The machine might be making us live our lives again only at some point to surprise us with some unthinkable horror or delight.
If such a machine arises and is capable of these feats, then we might currently be living in re-simulations of our past lives that have already ended.
Yeah, I prefer just denying the philosophical coherency of death (only experiences exist and being dead is not an experience), or alternatively relying on a quantum multiverse or other levels of the multiverse that imply one cannot die because they'll always live on somewhere.
So true. Even in the best case scenario if they manage to revive you perpetually, the universe will eventually end and then you'll be there to experience it... For someone who is afraid of dying, I can't think of a worse way to go.
To an atheist, uncertainty is the source of all hope.
>To an atheist, uncertainty is the source of all hope.
Isn't that somewhat backward? To an atheist, the certainty that they won't be going to an afterlife seems to be a source of hope, and for the religious person, the idea that they might is the same.
I don't know about other atheists, but I get some comfort knowing that the universe will continue to exist long after I die.
I don't believe that there is a god but that doesn't rule out the possibility of some kind of afterlife or reincarnation or alternative form of consciousness. There are still a lot of possibilities on the table and these possibilities are a source of hope.
When you think that your consciousness is special, irreplaceable and irreproducible, death becomes a lot more frightening.
On the other hand, if you believe, based on empirical evidence, that your consciousness can be manufactured out of a piece of meat with some chemicals and electricity as the result of a totally random natural process (evolution), that gives a lot of hope.
Small nit but my so far amateur understanding of philosophy of mind indicates to me that there isn't empirical evidence connecting Mind to neurochemistry so clearly. Neither, of course, is there any evidence of the reverse, that a non physical Mind can magically influence the physical world through the brain interface.
As an atheist, delving into the materialism vs dualism philosophical debate was fascinating. I was always a stout materialist but learning it hadn't managed to fend off every philosophical thrust was difficult but enlightening.
There is solid empirical evidence that every human was created out of basic physical materials (e.g. DNA, proteins). If this is the case, and you believe that every human is conscious then clearly the 'soul' must be derived from these physical materials and the processes which were applied to them.
Human bodies being made from matter does not imply that a hypothetical soul must also be made of physical matter.
It may not be scientific to propose that souls exist independent of matter (it seems a hard hypothesis to confirm or deny experimentally), but an idea does not need to be experimentally testable to be possible.
It doesn't even need to be that there are "souls," we just need to find a way to explain what Thought is. Saying it's the lights on an MRI aren't good enough - all the MRI tells us is that blood goes to certain parts of the brain during certain thoughts. Just like a radar gun displaying 50MPH isn't the car actually going 50MPH, so too do we need a way to explain what a Thought or Mind actually is.
So far this hasn't happened. If it had, it would be breaking news, because consciousness would be "solved."
> There is solid empirical evidence that every human was created out of basic physical materials (e.g. DNA, proteins)
Correct.
> If this is the case, and you believe that every human is conscious
At the very least, I know I am conscious, but let's continue.
> then clearly the 'soul' must be derived from these physical materials
Too far a stretch.
Mind / Thought / Consciousness is a unique problem. It is the unique problem, one that was carefully separated out at the beginning of the age of enlightenment when scientists carefully defined "qualitative" from "quantitative." Before that, heat was the feeling of heat and nothing else. Now, we can describe the "quantitative" properties of heat, that is, how certain temperatures cause certain materials to react, how biological entities react to heat, etc. That isn't the same thing as saying what it is to experience heat. Even though we can put someone in an MRI and touch a hot poker to their arm and watch the entire neurobiological system react and cause the arm to jolt, we still can't quantify the "experience of feeling heat." It's entirely separate, in fact it's separate in our language and scientific systems by design, because the "experience of feeling heat" is qualitative, it is immeasurable.
This is the split between materialism and dualism. Dualists believe the qualitative and quantitative will never shown to be the same thing, that even if quantitative can affect qualitative (heat causes certain thoughts), and qualitative can affect quantitative (thoughts can manifest real-world actions and consequences), they are fundamentally separate, "made of different stuff" (if consciousness is made of anything at all).
The materialist instinct is strong. As an atheist, I feel it too. Dualism implies magic, doesn't it? And magic isn't real. Perhaps, but not necessarily. Quantum physics can at times feel magic, too.
The long and short of it is you can't assume materialism is correct until the problem is more solved. Despite all these technological advancements in brain imaging technology, the fundamental problem of what is Thought remains. Acknowledging this isn't the same thing as acknowledging the validity of religion, or the possibility of the existence of souls - for example, panpsychism is a dualist hypothesis that states that the core nature of all things is consciousness, and that the more complicated things get, the more "conscious" they get. Considering the human brain is the most complicated thing we're aware of, that is a fairly straightforward and, in my opinion, believable concept. Far more believable than the existence of ghosts.
Not afterlife. It's just another medical treatment. And not one that much different from the current system world wide. If you have money/power you get better access to healthcare.
Sure, basically-everywhere-but-the-US has socialized medicine, but still everywhere if Jeff Bezos got sick he could go "I'll buy this hospital end every doctor in it. Do your best to cure me".
Freezing isn't magic. Just think of it as a better CPR. You wouldn't say this woman got "afterlife", even though apparently her blood wasn't pumping for 40 minutes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_B%C3%A5genholm
It depends. If cryonics becomes widespread, "ancient people" in suspended animation would be pretty common. There wouldn't be that much to learn from reviving all of them.
There's an expression called ruling from the grave to reflect the difficulty of enforcing a contract after you are dead. The same principle applies as those frozen people are dead in every legal sense and practical sense and likely any biological sense.
I would be extremely motivated to revive them and promote reviving them because I would also want to be frozen and revived. I assume this would be even moreso the case if society develops reviving technology, and therefore knows it actually works.
the argument is this: certain death vs a miniscule one in a quadrillion chance or lower. It will always tilt the other way no matter what the current scientific status quo is saying because it's possible in theory and it has happened to living organisms before just not humans. Whether it's good for environment, your siblings pocket etc is not part of the core argument.
I think even if you ignore the environment, and cost, the argument for cryonics is not very good.
Let's say someone is successfully revived, there's still heart attacks, cancer, crime (and not just "lowly" criminals, crime also happens within families for inheritance, for example), accidents (car, or just slipping in the shower), earthquakes, ... The list is pretty much endless.
Death is unavoidable, IMHO it's best to learn to cope with it, and focus efforts on reducing what most people would consider the worst deaths (infants, long and painful diseases, wars and torture, etc).
That said, as long as not many people try this (the environmental cost would be high), if many people think about this possibility and that helps them cope with their mortality, and that of their loved ones, good for them.
Even though Death is unavoidable, it’s still a good idea to wear a seatbelt.
Edited to add: it’s hard to imagine a civilisation with the technology to successfully re-animate a corpse, but that is unable to treat heart disease & cancer. Not impossible I suppose, but seems highly implausible.
Learning to cope with death is not actually mutually exclusive with taking a punt on cryonics! A 1% chance of survival is still a 99% chance of death, so you'd better have made your peace with it either way.
Yes, if only for the legal status of property/inheritance: if you are to be revided, who owns your wealth? Do you children inherit? And/when you are revived, what resources do you have? Is your family/descendants in charge of you, or you of them?
Cryogenic preservation is treated like mummification, you’re just declared dead. At which point your assets are likely to just get spent.
If you want to be safe, set up a trust that pays to you preferably and if not then to any descendants you have. That’s unlikely to work if you’re somehow revived in several hundred years, but it’s better than hopping random people will hand you money voluntarily.
If you meant this one, it should be obvious that it's not exclusively about coders. Even if it was, your argument is quite weak if you don't qualify the non zero part a bit more. Zero chance of living how much longer than you would have otherwise? under what conditions? At what cost?
That's precisely why strict logic is required. You are putting more restrains into a very simple condition. Dead or infinitely small non zero chance of not dead. As said previously, anything else is noise
Respectfully, I disagree.
I think the condition may be simple if looked at it from, say, a programming logic point of view. But given the costs involved, I think the other constraints are not noise: they're the signal needed to make the right decision.
Specifically, since you brought this up in the context of someone who will die of cancer, the tradeoff calculation must take into account that even if cryonics work (which is already a giant leap of faith right now), this person would also need science to advance enough so that a cancer that is terminal now will be somehow reversible in the future. Additionally, all the people he cares about would have to have survived too for this to matter. Again, this is all context, this is within the context of a dying person that says "Almost immediately I realised I just couldn’t do it. Life for me is about living, not just clocking up the years.". I don't think all of these extra constraints would be seen as noise by someone like him.
Or give the money to your children so they have a small head start that can use to conquer the world (eventually).
Also, what happens if you are revived?
Where are you going to live? Your home was probably sold a long time ago, or you must share it with all the intermediate revived generations. What about money?
Where are you going to work? Imagine the frozen time was only 100 year. It is difficult to predict what will happen in 100 years, but it is easier to look at the past. Medical doctors didn't have penicillin and Electrical Engineers didn't have transistors. You must take most of your university courses again and perhaps part of your high school classes too.
Africa is a big continent, there is a wide difference in income and education level, from country to country and even inside each country.
If you have some spare money to pay a refrigerator for 100 years, you are probably spoiled and want nice living conditions afterwards.
Anyway, imagine you live outside a city and have only a small plot of land for subsistence. After the 100 years you don't have even the small plot of land and don't have the small herd that you inherit from your parents. How/where are you going to live? Farming has changed in the last 100 years. Artificial nitrogen fertilizers have slightly more than 100 years, now there are genetically modified crops, the preferred crops have changed. (Do you know how to harvest soy?) The cattle management has also changed, antibiotics, vitamins supplements, the number of free range herds is decreasing,...
> If you have some spare money to pay a refrigerator for 100 years, you are probably spoiled and want nice living conditions afterwards.
You'd want nice living conditions no matter what you're used to.
I really don't understand your point.
Is it "nah, if I can't have netflix I'd rather just die"?
People are very adaptable. What happened more than three months ago doesn't seem to affect your happiness.
So absolute worst case you are thawed out (because you paid for it), but are now completely broke and unemployable, there is zero social safety net or UBI, and no chance for you to even steal food. You are 100% certain to starve to death. So kill yourself then? At least your got a brief glimse of how it all turned out.
I'd rather be alive and work for food in a circus as "the millennial man" than die and do nothing.
* You can invest X money for a Y% chance that you will be revived in the future.
* You can invest X money for a Z% chance that your children will survive in %W case of a problem. Like a better surgeon in a heart operation or cancer treatment, or more food stored before a famine, or a home that is not in a floodable area, or more education to get an points to get a visa to another country, some swimming classes to be more healthy, more airbags in the car in case of a collision, ...
Money can buy survival rate when it is correctly invested, the question is which one is the the one that gets more bang for the buck.
PS: Just in case you are wondering, I didn't downvote you.
Well, it's not quite so black and white. We have something resembling a roadmap to achieving the revival of a cryopreserved patient, but it's hardly a certainty. The fact that your roadmap has a few more details on than does the roadmap of $religion does not make them qualitatively different.
Pascal's wager would be verifiable if, say, someone invented a device like the ones in the Ghostbusters movies. That seems about as promising as freezing yourself after you die in my mind...
It's not a generic tangent - it's a direct reference to Pascal's wager [1]. Unfortunately the parent doesn't make their argument any more generic that Pascal's wager itself.
Ah I see. But then you should have said "Sounds just like Pascal's Wager". That's a great point and not generic at all.
The trouble with what you did post is that it landed with readers as generic religious flamewar whether you meant it that way or not. I realize it's not always possible to predict how things will land, but the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate intent. Here are some previous explanations on this theme if interested:
God wants your exclusive devotion. The freezer doesn't care what else you're doing to help you to cheat death, so you can spread your faith around more and hedge your bets.
Alcor, for example, charges what amounts to a fee to perform the preservation and a fee to go into a fund that will be invested to pay for your ongoing preservation. "Not giving your family an additional $80,000 on your death" amounts to the same thing as "taking $X from them in perpetuity", but it's psychologically different. It's all about the cost-benefit analysis, whose outcome may be different for different people; some people just don't value their lives very much and are more willing to die the true death, some people have family who are getting on just fine without the cash injection provided by their death so are more willing to spend the money on preservation, and so on.
"Not giving your family closure" is something you just have to discuss with your own family. I, for one, would treat cryopreservation as effectively death with a rather unusual body-disposal mechanism, for the purposes of grieving etc; there's certainly almost no chance I'll see a cryopreserved person again before my own first death. For a family made up of people like me, that particular argument holds no water at all.
"Alcor, for example, charges what amounts to a fee to perform the preservation and a fee to go into a fund that will be invested to pay for your ongoing preservation."
Which just adds another gamble. What are the chances of the economy having enough consistent growth that those investments last longer than it takes to revive you?
That depends on how cynical you are. There's also a non-zero probability that you're woken up in some sort of dystopia, made immortal and tortured until the heat death of the universe. Basically "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream." Death isn't the worst outcome imaginable.
Surely mass cryogenics is a non-starter in this day and age when we are concerned with lowering carbon emissions. All that refrigeration in perpetuity would consume so much energy, and keeping the dead frozen would erase the gains that we expect to get from the gradual decline in birthrates.
Are the carbon emissions that big of a deal? Every house in North America has at least one freezer. What scale are you envisioning when you say "mass"?
I've sometimes fancied that the discovery of immortality might be good for the environment, it changes the incentives for the biggest abusers. With that said, I'm not entirely confident of that in practice.
Volume scales cubically while surface area with the square of the length. It should be possible to build large scalable cooled facilities.
I do agree though that we aren't ready for such a system yet, both legally (currently a frozen person counts as dead, leading to their assets being taken away) and ecologically (carrying capacity limits of our planet). One day we might, who knows.
Would you have a planned death at 75 to potentially get resurrected in 200 years? I say yes. I like how it creates death planning. Just better hope the interest keeps compounding!
We are told we are born form our parents and from our culture. What if there was another story? what if we are dreaming, asleep? Or as I said before, maybe our birth is actually a death. Logically and superficially, yes, there is a thing we call birth. But what is it if you do not name it?
What did your face look like before you were born?
What, risk waking up to be transported to a "re-education" facility because what you did (or believed) in the past is no longer acceptable/legal to the current Maoist/Rightwing/Religious/Populist nut jobs in charge. Wake up to find the planet inundated and starving. Wake up to find that every single person you loved is now dead ... seems a bit of a hard sell.
Wake up to get put to work for another 100 years so you can pay more bills and then either die or be frozen again if you can afford it.
Actually this would be a cool short story about someone who has to constantly go through this process, each time working deeper and deeper in the future only to be frozen again.
I'm not someone who downvoted you, but you can't just assume everyone else sees value in the same things as you. Perhaps those votes are from people who find the whole digression about cryonics off-topic and boring?
So any topic that I don't like I downvote even if other people like to discuss about it and it's about science. Cool I guess HN is not fairing better than reddit here.
People fear what they do not understand. This has been happening to me for the 25 years I have been on the internet. It does not happen when people talk to me in person.
Most people come to the internet to validate their existence. I come to dismantle it.
You've posted 15 comments in this thread, most of which have been flamebait or outright trolling. You can't do that on HN, whether death is real or not. Please stop.
You see the term is meant to explain how people get enjoyment out of watching these sad stories, but they are just some dysfunctional replacement.
why do people go see sad movies? It is the same thing.
People on here talk about how bad trolls are and then they talk about stoicism and Diogenes. Diogenes would have been banned here as well, called a troll, etc. He pissed in the street like a dog right in front of people!
The ‘hacker’ ethos commonly involves sacrifice. In a zero sum life, striving to change the world, or achieve financial independence, or to learn new skills and abilities often means deferring relationships and emotions in favor of ‘work’, in the broadest definition of that word.
I think a lot of people here have an anxiety about the regrets they may have if their life were to suddenly become very finite. The article is the testament of a man coming to these realizations, and we are here to discuss the themes involved.
Thank you. I have another question - why have I been downvoted and flagged? Is it so unacceptable to ask questions in this community that your comments will be reported?
It's not a personal attack, it's just the community enforcing norms and guidelines.
The guidelines explicitly say "Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate" (the recommended action is to flag it or email the moderators), and it's the convention on HN to flag comments/posts that break the guidelines.
It's also unwelcome on HN for there to be "that person" who sullies a discussion involving personal reflections about life and death and other profound human contemplations, with a curmudgeonly comment complaining that it doesn't belong here. To be fair, someone always ends up being "that person" on every such thread, but it gets repetitive and predictable, which is why people are quick to downvote and flag.
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
"Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."
"How do you conflate not existing before birth to not existing after death?"
How can you not? Do you remember what it was like before you were born? Do you know of anyone who told you what it is like to be dead? If we do not know what death is how do we know what life is? We only know it by it's external appearance, which really tells us nothing.
I am not an existentialist or a nihilist, I am a Daoist who is indeed over 50 although I wish I was a young kid again. I was also a Theravada Buddhist for 20 years and have studied a large chunk of the Tripiṭaka. The things I am talking about are not appreciated with a moments thought.
The goal of enlightenment is understanding and escaping Samsara, the endless cycle of birth and death and the suffering that comes along with it. This is why I am a Daoist now, I just do not worry about these things and do not live in fear of my life and feel like I have to run out and "live life to my fullest" because of death, I do it because of life.
What are you trying to accomplish, here? Do you think the quote you responded to was wrong? Do you think no one should ever quote Schopenhauer? Something else?
Being more straightforward about your criticism would be fair.
And this is why wisdom tells us that all people are complex figures that can’t be put into “good” and “evil” buckets. If you look close enough at any historical figure they have lots of skeletons. I have yet to find the pure person who passes all of the current year’s litmus tests.
I still respect MLK even though credible reports say he observed and encouraged a rape, and John Lennon even though he beat his wife, and Michael Jackson’s music despite horror so unmentionable I won’t describe it here.
No doubt you are making a fair point about not putting people on pedestals, though perhaps not in the right context. When you spend your whole life thinking about things and writing those things down, some of those things will be objectionable. Thankfully it is up to the reader to take away what they want to learn from and leave behind what they do not.
My 17 year old daughter was already dealing with a life-altering chronic disease and losing her mom plus all of this pandemic bullshit has really made a mess. She broke down crying last night struggling over the idea of death and that everything seems to be pitted against her. It’s hard to know exactly what to say in those moments, maybe some of these words from a person at the doorstep will help her.
For what it’s worth we do have her seeing both a counselor and a psychiatrist but that only goes so far...at the end of the day it’s you and your thoughts staring at the ceiling while you’re trying to get to sleep for the 5am shift tomorrow.