Religion
Related: About this forumAtheist In A Foxhole
David Rönnegard asks how a committed atheist confronted with death might find consolation.
Nov/Dec 2014
I am a secularly-minded philosopher. Faith is not a virtue I hold. In particular, I disbelieve claims to knowledge about God’s existence or will. As an atheist and a Humanist, my approach to life has been grounded on rational thought and empirical evidence. I consider death to be the end of our conscious existence, and that any meaning that life may have resides with man.
Public reflecting on life is often done in fear of, but seldom in the face of, death. I am in the privileged but unenviable position of doing the latter. I have just been told, at the age of 37, that I have stage four lung cancer. Atheism and news of one’s impending death would appear to be a particularly unfortunate combination. From where does a faithless philosopher obtain consolation? What provides meaning for a life lived, and acceptance of a fate anticipated?
Having never had an inclination towards the supernatural, religion has never appeared to me as either credible or a source of comfort. News of looming death has not encouraged me to grasp for false consolation, though consolation is sorely needed. Rather, my obsession with death has hitherto been soothed by Socrates’ description of philosophy as the process by which one comes to accept one’s own death. Now, confronted with the terminal nature of life at a young age, I wonder if I have sufficiently moved along this process of acceptance, which is invariably a very personal one.
Philosophers are often caricatured as dealing with the big questions, particularly the meaning of life, but I have rarely observed this to be a matter of concern among professional philosophers, other than fleetingly in conversation with colleagues after some beers. Few thinkers of a non-religious bent have tried to address the question of meaning head-on. Perhaps as independent thinkers philosophers nowadays have a tacit understanding that life’s meaning or value is a personal journey; but most philosophers I know don’t seem to spend much time pondering the meaning of their own lives either. And if the philosophers among us are not doing it, who is? It’s the elephant in the room of secular thought.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/105/Atheist_In_A_Foxhole
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
cbayer
(146,218 posts)and he remains in their memories.
rock
(13,218 posts)Faith is not a virtue that anyone holds. Faith is not a virtue. To see that, imagine that you have faith in "X". Is that good or bad in and of itself? It depends on what "X" is, not the fact that you have faith in it.
rug
(82,333 posts)Accompanied by charity.
Do you consider hope a virtue?
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Actually feels a little insulting, but I'll assume you didn't mean that.
I don't have faith but I think, on the aggregate, that life will be ok as I go through it.
When I think of faith, I think of Emily Dickinson who said "faith is doubt."
Which makes me think of my favorite Dickinson poem:
“Hope” is the thing with feathers -
That perches in the soul -
And sings the tune without the words -
And never stops - at all -
And sweetest - in the Gale - is heard -
And sore must be the storm -
That could abash the little Bird
That kept so many warm -
I’ve heard it in the chillest land -
And on the strangest Sea -
Yet - never - in Extremity,
It asked a crumb - of me.
Probably enough mental rambling for this reply.
rug
(82,333 posts)Otherwise it is simply foolish.
How do you find that insulting?
I think you're inferring the converse.
Dickinson is fine but Hopkins is downright intense.
By Gerard Manley Hopkins
Not, I'll not, carrion comfort, Despair, not feast on thee;
Not untwist — slack they may be — these last strands of man
In me ór, most weary, cry I can no more. I can;
Can something, hope, wish day come, not choose not to be.
But ah, but O thou terrible, why wouldst thou rude on me
Thy wring-world right foot rock? lay a lionlimb against me? scan
With darksome devouring eyes my bruisèd bones? and fan,
O in turns of tempest, me heaped there; me frantic to avoid thee and flee?
Why? That my chaff might fly; my grain lie, sheer and clear.
Nay in all that toil, that coil, since (seems) I kissed the rod,
Hand rather, my heart lo! lapped strength, stole joy, would laugh, chéer.
Cheer whom though? the hero whose heaven-handling flung me, fóot tród
Me? or me that fought him? O which one? is it each one? That night, that year
Of now done darkness I wretch lay wrestling with (my God!) my God.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Holidays can bring on the sentimental.
rock
(13,218 posts)OK, you've skunked me. I thought and thought about it but I don't know.
It's usually considered one of the virtues but it's been tarnished with adjectives like false, baseless, and desperate.
Looking at it from a purely secular perspective, it's as much a virtues as optimism is over pessimism and it's "good" to the extent that despair is "bad".
Reasonable expectation doesn't have the same ring to it.
ArsSkeptica
(38 posts)...but a little Epicureanism may go a long way. Again, it may be easier said than done, but acceptance of death as the end may well be its own consolation.
From his letter to Menoeceus:
Death is no concern to us. All things good and bad are experienced through sensation, but sensation ceases at death. So death is nothing to us, and to know this makes a mortal life happy. Life is not improved by adding infinite time; removing the desire for immortality is what’s required. There is no reason why one who is convinced that there is nothing to fear at death should fear anything about it during life. And whoever says that he dreads death not because it’s painful to experience, but only because it’s painful to contemplate, is foolish. It is pointless to agonize over something that brings no trouble when it arrives. So death, the most dreaded of evils, is nothing to us, because when we exist, death is not present, and when death is present, we do not exist. It neither concerns the living nor the dead, since death does not exist for the living, and the dead no longer exist.
Of course, there's that small detail of the dying process itself when sensation hasn't yet ceased and may be wracked with acute pains. Epicurus claimed to have dealt with those pains of dying adequately with fond remembrances of past philosophical discussions. I don't know about all that. It seems like a flimsy prescription to hand out when visiting a burn ward, for instance. Maybe such fond recollections coupled with industrial-strength painkillers would ease the transition.
rug
(82,333 posts)No one has yet learned how to die.
I like what Marcus Aurelius said in Meditations, Book IV:
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)That's a pretty insulting thing to say, actually.
rug
(82,333 posts)Do you know how to die?
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Comedy is hard.
rug
(82,333 posts)How many people have you been with as they died?
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Your hatred blinds you, and someone claiming an absolute shouldn't accuse anyone of bravado.
rug
(82,333 posts)The whooshing sound you heard was you ducking the question.
And you get me wrong. I hate stupidity not stupid persons.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)But I know you prefer to keep digging rather than spend two seconds resolving an issue.
How about that absoulte statement? You know that no one knows how to die?
rug
(82,333 posts)How many people have you been with as they died?
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)There was recently a woman who made the conscious decidion to end her life, seems she "learned how to die"
rug
(82,333 posts)And there's no games in the question you avoid. I take it your answer is "none'. Which only underscores the bullshit in your own absolutist statement: "dieing (sic) is easy".
Choosing the circumstances makes it no less easy.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)I made no absolute statement, a Google search would really save you some face here. You, on thevotherbhand, made one and cannot back it up.
rug
(82,333 posts)And still won't answer. For obvious reasons.
I see this has been yet another waste of time with you.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)And your apparent ignorance ofvthe history of the stage, combined with your refusal to perform a simple google search majes for quite an amusing bit of entertainment.
You madecan absolute statement, and you can't back it up, because if you could, you would have.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)However, I am willing to answer it anyway.
Now I would like to know of what import the question was.
rug
(82,333 posts)Use your google. It should be easy to debunk, your current efforts notwithstanding.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)It doesn't even make sense.
And what's with this lashing out?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)"His last words were alleged to be "dying is easy; comedy is hard.""
rug
(82,333 posts)This doesn't sound easy:
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It was misspelled, however, which might have given you trouble if you'd searched for the precise wording of that post.
rug
(82,333 posts)Now that I know the source, it does have the tenor of melodrama. Thanks.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Death is inexorable. It'll come if you want it or not, eventually.
Comedy on the other hand...
rug
(82,333 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)In some cases, simply 'give up'.
In some, you take careful aim, and pull the trigger.
In others, you cross the street, and fail to reach your destination.
Death comes in many forms. Some embraced, some not. Some accidental, some not. Some unavoidable, some not.
There are several criteria, mostly medical, under which I would terminate myself. Honestly, I'm surprised more people haven't given it considerable thought/planning.
rug
(82,333 posts)More precisely, the question is, how does one confront death, as the OP is doing. The corollary is, even if one thinks it through in advance, the actual experience is different from the expectation. And, of course, no one's come back to say how it went.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Have you ever been in a life-safety sort of situation before, where the outcome was uncertain and potentially beyond your control? How did you approach that problem?
That is, likely, how you would approach death. Death is just that sort of situation, with a particular outcome.
rug
(82,333 posts)But I think death is in a category all by itself. It is literally an existential crisis.
I once heard a priest discuss death in a sermon. He was talking about deathbed conversions some have, the immense sadness some feel while others experience joy. He had quite a list, which all rang true.
The one that stuck with me is a man who had terminal cancer, like the OP. Medically, he had very little time left. The priest spoke to him when he got the diagnosis and the man made all sorts of solemn pronouncements about how he was going to use his final days. His intentions were pretty much what you'd expect anyone, believer or nonbeliever to say: do good, be loving, seek peace, etc.
Well the priest saw him pretty regularly until he died.
He concluded by saying, the man pretty well continued to live the way he had been, doing the same things he always did, deathbed intentions or no.
He said, "we die the way we have lived." I think that's a pretty accurate observation.
He went on to say, therefore we should live according to blah, blah, blah, but I'll spare you that.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Looks like we are pretty much in agreement here. Not exactly a habit, but pleasant nonetheless.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)(Except the top level, which specified 'easier said than done')
Jim__
(14,083 posts)I agree. My sympathies to Dr. Rönnegard who seems to be handling a tough situation rather well.
One thing Existentialism might do for you is bring you face to face with the stark realities of the human condition before a medical diagnosis does. A descriptive notion is probably necessary before getting to a prescriptive one.
stone space
(6,498 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
rug
(82,333 posts)Recite it aloud. Each word is like a bite.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It is not quoted in its entirety, but enough of a tease I had to look it up.
Took me a while to work out what 'Because their words had forked no lightning' meant. It initially seemed to me the opposite of the rest of the poem.
rug
(82,333 posts)Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
