Regardless of how we define "fear of death", it’s clear that evolution has programmed us to avoid death. If not, we (the human race) wouldn’t be here.

You're very right. One of my old teachers used to say if you point a gun at a man who is about to jump off a bridge, he'll certainly duck.
But that is because all life strives to exist, I'm studying Biology right now and if its one thing I've learned, the meaning or purpose of life is simply to exist and reproduce.

In my experience, most people I meet are atheists, or if they "belong" to a religion, they don't really believe it anyway.



To "exist and reproduce" seems like a pretty menial, insubstantial purpose for life. I think even for people who acknowledge this, they still find their lives rather meaningless. My experiences with DMT have suggested to me that life is more meaningful and significant than merely carrying out the vital life functions.

I concur with almost everything gibran2 has said so far in the thread, but attributing purpose to our biological machine always makes my spider sense tingle. Like I guess we all do, I'm trying to bring along into my psychedelic experiences my previous experience and learnings. Even if it's just to tear them apart and replace them with new paradigms, whenever I come to them. I've been what you would call a neo-darwinist since I left college, and teleology (purpose, intention, directionality) is something I haven't been able to fit into my view of the world. At least not regarding our biology.

In other words, I do not think we are programmed the way a coder builds a piece of software. I agree so far with Crick's concept of a "frozen accident", of complex life as outcome of the very configuration of this universe, in this planet in particular, shaped the way the Colorado Canyon is - a million different nuances, product of setting and the utmost complex interaction, derived from a blueprint described by our physical laws.

Intuitively, I think consciousness is a quality intrinsic to reality. I don't think it's a byproduct of neurological processes. I don't think it's an epiphenomenon. That view has a lot to do, of course, with my few experiences with entheogens. Now my view is, death is the destruction of an identity. Our survival instincts are the symptom and evidence for what necessarily had to happen in order to be the way we are, and to experience consciousness the way we understand it as "human". Purposes are made by ourselves.

I have never stepped into hyperspace yet. Hopefully chances will appear soon. Do you think that will most likely shatter this darwinism, this absence of belief in purpose, this conviction that if there was a purpose, it would be unfathomable? Do you think your insights from spice have given you a firm intuition of purpose, beyond the one you make yourselves?

"We spend our whole lives trying to stop death. Eating, inventing, loving, praying, fighting, killing. But what do we really know about death? Just that nobody comes back. But there comes a point in life - a moment - when your mind outlives its desires, its obsessions, when your habits survive your dreams, and when your losses... Maybe death is a gift. You wonder..."

-The Life of David Gale-

Wow you must live in a very free-thinking area to meet a lot of atheists. The vast majority of people I meet believe in God, higher power or some spiritual existence, that is all it takes to be a theist IMO. You may be misinterperting those religious people's views who "don't really believe" in their religion.

To your other point I'm talking about the biological purpose of life. That is completely separate from any meaning given by humans.
You see we are a special form of life, we evolved conciousness and we(myself included) attach the higher meanings ourselves.
In fact, the idea that our lives end at death is what gives our lives meaning.
If we're only here for a finite amount of time and that's all we get, doesn't that make this life far more meaningful that if we were part of an infinite existence?
My idea is we make the meanings in our own lives.
I was merely stating the biological purpose behind life, for all life including prokaryotic bateria.

I find a lot of people who are turned off by mainstream religion, which seems to have a monopoly on the god concept, call themselves atheists just to draw a sharp contrast with what they ARE NOT aligned with in their thinking. Most self described atheists I know hate discussing topics like religion and epistemology simply because it's frustrating to them when they don't get the concepts your trying to say. Most of the ones I know are more concerned with just living life than trying to understand where it comes from or where it's going. I respect this mentality to be honest, I spend way to much time in my head and not enough time actually living.

You make an unjustifiable assumption that humans are the only form of life that has evolved consciousness that can ascribe higher meanings. No amount of technology will be able to show you what somebody is thinking just as you will never be able to see what another organism, no matter how "primitive", thinks. On the other hand my experience with entheogens suggest that there may be consciousness in many things such as plants or even potentially inanimate matter.

No amount of technology, really? Can you predict the future Global?
I certainly can't, but I believe many things will one day be possible that people currently say no amount of technology could do. In fact, texting by thought technology and airport mental scanners are predicted to be widespread by 2030. I can't say for sure this will happen, but you'll never hear me make such a broad encompassing statement that we will never be able to achieve that level of technology.

Furthermore, biologically speaking you need things like nerves and a brain to even have consciousness beyond simple irritability(which most organisms show). The fact that we have complex language and have even created things like technology(think disease prevention) leads me to believe we do indeed have a higher form of consciousness than all organisms on Earth(In fact I think that's part of the human experience). I never meant to implicate other animals aren't conscious, but they have a different form of consciousness than us.

A great example of this is the mirror test, animals that can recognize themselves in a mirror are scarce, afaik, they are only the great apes(Chimpanzees,Gorillas,Orangutans and Humans), gibbons, elephants, dolphins, orcas and magpies that can pass this test. That test shows a level of consciousness where you understand yourself as organism and don't simply respond to stimuli(irritability). This stuff makes a lot more sense through biology, then through "experience with entheogens" IMO.

Now whether or not this type of consciousness could exist elsewhere in the universe is an entirely different subject. But don't knock yourself down, we are different. We are one of the ways for the universe to know itself, we can comprehend and understand things well beyond the level of a plant simply turning itself towards sunshine.
I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

My dog seems to recognize itself in the mirror...but I digress. You're deducting your information on these other organisms' consciousness based on behaviorism which is a very faulty model. I saw this following quote in the "octopus and connectedness" thread over in the hyperspace lounge yesterday.



Let's take the plant that uses calcium to "transmit messages" as an example. From a reductionist standpoint, it has moved some calcium around which causes it to do different things or function differently, thus modifying its "behavior", but no thought involved. Analogously let's take a comatose (or even a dreaming) human who is fully conscious. You can measure neurotransmitters being released and such, but you'd have no way of proving that he is having thoughts (even though he is) because he is unable to modify his behavior substantially to show through, so in your model, he can't be thinking (even though he does). Because plants have a way of modifying their behavior that has little in common with humans (and occurs in larger time intervals), I think we have a hard time relating to them and picking up on the subtleties of their behavior as sentient organisms.

I lost my fear of death when i started to contemplate its opposite , eternal life. Now you know what scares me? the concept of being a sentient being cursed to experience true eternity. Think about and try to truly understand this image. You could take a slow stroll around the entire observable universe a trillion times, and then a trillion more and yet by the time you eventualy got back you would still not even have the slightest clue on how long eternity is.

In short there will be nothing more horrifying for a sentient being than for it to experience eternity

Hence the need for the illusion of finiteness.

I think the sense of eternity being "long" is a complete misconception of the word. Eternity is neither long nor short. It's not a length of time as it is devoid of time entirely. Boredom is a function of time. As a result, an experience in eternity where time doesn't exist should be devoid of boredom.

Not quite, if when we die we go to a place without time it would be functionaly the same as dieing and that being the true end. when you come to think about it thoughts emotions actions and any change is also a function of time entirely

not to be a grammar nazi or anything, but would it not be finitude?

They are synomyms:


Related forms

fi·nite·ly, adverb
fi·nite·ness, noun
non·fi·nite, adjective, noun
non·fi·nite·ly, adverb
non·fi·nite·ness, noun


@ Perderabo: Timelessness does not imply a static, unchanging existence.

Umm.. actualy it does. For the effect of time is for things to change, atoms vibrate, electrons spin the earth rotates. but now lets say all that froze to a stop in an instant. then that is the only way i can see how you can say it would be timeless, as only then would time have no effect on it anymore.

I get the impression that you think there is this thing called timelessness that has all the charecteristics of time yet is not time, maybe i am wrong but it is the impression i get

Have you ever had the experience of timelessness, or the experience of a simulated timelessness? If so, please describe.

Mate i know what you are trying to say but you must realise that is only an illusion of timelesness, because for that feeling to exist i still had to be anchored to time. my brain was still working, my neurons where still firing and it is those processes within time that gave me the illusion of timelesness.

tell me how can i think when there is no time for my thoughts to form? how can i act when there is no time in which my actions can take place? How can i do or be anything when there is no time in which anything can happen?

I never meant to imply that you do indeed have thoughts or actions in an eternal "space". That's kind of what I was getting at when I was talking about boredom as a function of time. It doesn't exist, just as thoughts and actions don't exist either as they too are functions of time. Food for thought.