Why is death a concern for the naturalist?

[dwmitch]

According to the naturalist view we came into existance when chemicals came together to form a cell, which mutated into several different forms until we ended up with what we see today.

My question is, then, if we are nothing more than a series of chemical interactions then why go into a depression if you find you only have weeks to live? Why weep when a loved one passes away? Why worry about endangered species?

In all of these cases all that happens is cessation of chemical reactions. To rephrase these questions, why go into a depression when you find that chemicals will soon or already have ceased to enable a person to function? And why spend billions of dollars and hours to enable chemicals to interact with each other?

If, by some anomaly, the hydrogen and oxygen molecules that comprise the water of the Pacific Ocean were to seperate. Would the Atlantic Ocean shed any tears over it?

[IsmAvatar]

haha, excellent topic, my friend. One I have begun to touch into and debate myself.

First, and I don't mean to attack a rhetorical question, but I feel obligated because some people are too thick to realise it was rhetorical... (not you, but some people)
The ocean has no emotions because it has no brain to make use of such things. The ocean would not shed a tear, unfortunately, because it is too unlike living things. Even if you go into the chemical makeup of the ocean being the same as tears (salt and water), if it dried up there would be no salt-water to shed.

Back on topic, tho.

I believe a true naturalist who fully understands their beliefs would not shed a tear for the basic natural loss of something. On the other hand, the delibarate loss or intentional killing of something which is unnatural is understandable to raise a few emotions.

Now that I've placed the ocean and naturalist tears out of the way, let me address the topic I feel is at hand, but still keeping our friend nature in mind.

Why do we fear death? Why do we shed a tear at death? Especially natural death. What is our reasoning behind that?
Those of you who know me know that I like to place the blame of a lot of things on religion. I partly blame religion. lol. Religion has placed such a big thing on dying, that it's almost impossible to resist turning your eye to them.
Curious, tho, that many religions portray death as a joyful occurance in which the subject shall 'move on to a better place.' Religion and fantasy (however much i'd love to use them interchangeably) are known for this heroizing of death. It is a basic escape from the dread of death. But if religion is an escape from this dread, how could religion be the creator of this dread?
I have 1 history and 1 theory. History: In days of old, religion mandated that you mourn death. Let that be the initial answer to "Why is religion to blame?". You could hire professional criers (forget what they're called) that would whip themselves to force themselves to cry for the death. I'm convinced it's one of those things where it's "mourn because god said so." It quickly became ingrained in society. The theory is that it's a scheme. "We must make death dreaded so that people will become religious to avoid this fear."

BUT (and yes, I dare to contradict myself)...
children mourn deaths too. Children are not familiar with the idea of death, and it is difficult (and rarely) nurtured into them - it must be natural. So what part of nature is it? Answer: the nature of bonding. A child loves a person, bonds with them, perhaps becomes dependant upon them. The loss of that person triggers a chemical reaction in the brain (aka, an emotion) in which the child realises that they can no longer experience that bond, and this will make them cry. It carries on to adults, too, but I used children because adults are already under the general assumption that death should be mourned.
I expect that the above explanation may be enough for you to develop your own philosophical reasonings on the topic. I don't want to force you to think any particular way, tho it would be great if you agree with what I say. I'm just offering my take on it. Take it, leave it, analyze it, throw it up in the air and dice it, whatever you want, it's there for your leisure.

I'll check back later and maybe post my philosophical findings on "Why NOT death? Why shan't we all just go die?"

-Ism

[dwmitch]

admin said:

First, and I don't mean to attack a rhetorical question, but I feel obligated because some people are too thick to realise it was rhetorical...

At the risk of showing ignorance by possibly misunderstanding the comment about it being rhetorical, I'll admit the question about the ocean was, but the rest is genuine curiosity.

As a Christian death is a concern for me (not a fear, as while I'm not suicidal I still am not afraid of dying) because I am unsure of the spiritual state of those who die. However, naturalists don't believe in a soul, so it is truly baffling why they mourn death. You've answered some of my questions, but I'm still somewhat baffled.

[IsmAvatar]

I think you need to specify what type of death. Unnatural, or Natural death.
If you are questioning the emotion of 'mourning' or 'sorrow', I'm sorry but I haven't studied the brain. I'd imagine there must be some sort of chemical released when a certain mentally programmed event occurs, similar to that of the salivation from a dog when it hears a food bell.

[evilish]

'Death' to me is the sudden failure in an organism causing to to cease it's functions.
I believe that religion was invented partly because our instinct inside us makes not want to die, or more technicly, become nothing.
With a religion, you believe that even if you die, you'll still be somewhere, causing us to feel much more relief about death. But we still have that feeling inside us that keeps telling us death is a bad thing. That is why I believe we mourn.

When we are born, we already know alot of things, sub conscious things that evolution has made us remember over time. How to breathe/when to breathe. Over time memory gets added to this, through a much period of time the commonly remembered things can become sub conscious memory. We call our functioning 'intelligience', when all it really is just recalling past information.

- Evilish(really... really restricts self to stay ontopic, and not go completely insane insulting religion)

[IsmAvatar]

Re: Mourning

Evilish, you are somewhat following in my philosophical footsteps. As a result, what you have said is quite obvious to me, but I suppose it needed to be said. Not to mention, sometimes it takes the obvious to unravel the oblivious who have gotten so lost in deep thought that they have lost touch with reality.
Keep thinking. It's healthy for you (although I might note that holding a grudge against someone or something, including but not limited to Religion, is unhealthy for you).

Here's something to chew on in your philosophical thoughts:

If life is a joke, then death must be the punchline.



I've been briefly touching into naturalist perspectives every other day. Consider this: Life is beautiful, and so is death, in a perfect harmony along the great circles of nature. But it is not a circle; instead it is a spiral, wherein history will repeat itself, but it will be on a higher level than last time. Each time around, we must discard the old, and welcome the new. Lest we shall forever be stuck in the same place - a condition that the germans named "Tuom", and the English adopted to be "Doom".