"To desire immortality is to desire the eternal perpetuation of a great mistake."
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Jenfrench
I really like that quote!
It's from Arthur Schopenhauer.
What do you guys think about it? Let's discuss.
It's from Arthur Schopenhauer.What do you guys think about it? Let's discuss.
It's a great quote. Here are some others:
“If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence, or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood?”
“Human life must be some kind of mistake. The truth of this will be sufficiently obvious if we only remember that man is a compound of needs and necessities hard to satisfy; and that even when they are satisfied, all he obtains is a state of painlessness, where nothing remains to him but abandonment to boredom. This is direct proof that existence has no
real value in itself; for what is boredom but the feeling of the emptiness of life? If life—the craving for which is the very essence of our being—were possessed of any positive intrinsic value, there would be no such thing as boredom at all: mere existence would satisfy us in itself, and we should want for nothing.”
I find it odd as to how can people not be curious of their entirety. Perhaps my thought patterns are simply unconventional but are you not curious as to what the fundamental nature of the Universe is? Of course there is no guarantee that absolute understanding is even possible or how you would even know that you have known everything but the possibility of such an occurrence is enough to desire immortality.
Just think about it, you spend about the first 20 years of your life studying, developing your ideas and your personal philosophy and drive in life, work hard to develop skills, discover interests, strive for your dreams of varying magnitudes, perhaps continue the biological necessity of copulation for the conception of a new generation, go into the working world, climb your way up, possibly engage in intellectual battles with people that you actually relate to, gain fame or watch your ambitions wane in magnitude, retire, enjoy a varying number of years in retirement ( or perhaps lack of purpose for some ) and then die. And with death ends all your work, all the effort, all the ambitions, it all ends. Such a inherent pointlessness in life and you are not even considering immortality to even understand why the hell are we even doing what we are doing? My only conclusion that most people either do not have the ambitions nor mentality to desire immortality or they simply have nothing worth living on past their supposed lifespan. I guess evolution does play a part in this mindset as well. To witness what was science fiction become a reality.To be able to spar intellectually and exchange ideas with the best minds of the future. There is just so much there is to be explored, so much exciting things yet to be experienced that I just cannot see how one can simply not desire immortality. Probably just people who do not have any interest past their daily lives and their social circle.
About the quote, looking at it from a possible scientific explanation of the existence of humans in terms of pure probability. A mistake in that sense isn't inherently positive nor negative. Mistakes often have a negative connotation attached to them but what we consider mistakes are from a human point of view. In the inherent state of the Universe, does mistakes even exist? The concept of morality is also another good one. Is there something in this Universe that can be considered objectively good or evil? I would say no. Good and evil exist only in the human context as an evolutionary measure to promote the survival of the human race. We can't have everyone killing each other as it would be detrimental to our survival. That is why, in my opinion and understanding of scientific concepts as to why killing humans are wrong, the reasoning is similar behind religion. Perhaps we are evolutionary inclined to try to survive at a younger age, but that drive slowly diminishes as we grow older and evolution eradicates the old for the transition the the new. It might be a fundamental law of nature...or there might be a loophole. It's worth a try.
Probably didn't articulate my thoughts as perfectly as I wanted to but I hope I got my point across.
Just think about it, you spend about the first 20 years of your life studying, developing your ideas and your personal philosophy and drive in life, work hard to develop skills, discover interests, strive for your dreams of varying magnitudes, perhaps continue the biological necessity of copulation for the conception of a new generation, go into the working world, climb your way up, possibly engage in intellectual battles with people that you actually relate to, gain fame or watch your ambitions wane in magnitude, retire, enjoy a varying number of years in retirement ( or perhaps lack of purpose for some ) and then die. And with death ends all your work, all the effort, all the ambitions, it all ends. Such a inherent pointlessness in life and you are not even considering immortality to even understand why the hell are we even doing what we are doing? My only conclusion that most people either do not have the ambitions nor mentality to desire immortality or they simply have nothing worth living on past their supposed lifespan. I guess evolution does play a part in this mindset as well. To witness what was science fiction become a reality.To be able to spar intellectually and exchange ideas with the best minds of the future. There is just so much there is to be explored, so much exciting things yet to be experienced that I just cannot see how one can simply not desire immortality. Probably just people who do not have any interest past their daily lives and their social circle.
About the quote, looking at it from a possible scientific explanation of the existence of humans in terms of pure probability. A mistake in that sense isn't inherently positive nor negative. Mistakes often have a negative connotation attached to them but what we consider mistakes are from a human point of view. In the inherent state of the Universe, does mistakes even exist? The concept of morality is also another good one. Is there something in this Universe that can be considered objectively good or evil? I would say no. Good and evil exist only in the human context as an evolutionary measure to promote the survival of the human race. We can't have everyone killing each other as it would be detrimental to our survival. That is why, in my opinion and understanding of scientific concepts as to why killing humans are wrong, the reasoning is similar behind religion. Perhaps we are evolutionary inclined to try to survive at a younger age, but that drive slowly diminishes as we grow older and evolution eradicates the old for the transition the the new. It might be a fundamental law of nature...or there might be a loophole. It's worth a try.
Probably didn't articulate my thoughts as perfectly as I wanted to but I hope I got my point across.
Original post by gorve
Thanks miser.
While the idea that death was not "meant to be" could be true however I believe you could equally say that it would not take an "objective consciousness" to create death because death is a concept we created, as far as I can tell death is simply the name we call something that has ended. Or exists no more.
While the idea that death was not "meant to be" could be true however I believe you could equally say that it would not take an "objective consciousness" to create death because death is a concept we created, as far as I can tell death is simply the name we call something that has ended. Or exists no more.
Hey, sorry didn't click this thread for a while. Yes, I don't believe it took an objective consciousness to 'create death', only that it would have required one for the existence of death to be 'meant' to be. I believe death is, like you say, a concept we came up with, which is merely a label for the absence of existence where there had been existence previously. Death itself does not exist for the individual.
Original post by gorve
Also I agree with you when you say its weakly argued to say that something natural is right but I believe that you can say that something natural is "meant to be" more than something artificial unless you say that this same objective conciousness created us so that we could make the things which created the disired end product which would be immortality.
(if that makes sence)
(if that makes sence)
I agree on this point, but it's merely a matter of semantics over whether we agree it's meaningful to call what's natural "meant to be". To me, "meant" implies intention. For example, "I meant to go to the shops"; "he means to eat the pineapple" - in all cases it requires a subject to do the meaning (it is a verb and must be performed by something). Therefore I can agree metaphorically with a pantheistic sentiment that God (i.e., nature) means for us to die, but as I said, it is only a word game.
Original post by Flying Scotsman
It's a great quote. Here are some others:
“If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence, or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood?”
“Human life must be some kind of mistake. The truth of this will be sufficiently obvious if we only remember that man is a compound of needs and necessities hard to satisfy; and that even when they are satisfied, all he obtains is a state of painlessness, where nothing remains to him but abandonment to boredom. This is direct proof that existence has no
real value in itself; for what is boredom but the feeling of the emptiness of life? If life—the craving for which is the very essence of our being—were possessed of any positive intrinsic value, there would be no such thing as boredom at all: mere existence would satisfy us in itself, and we should want for nothing.”
“If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence, or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood?”
“Human life must be some kind of mistake. The truth of this will be sufficiently obvious if we only remember that man is a compound of needs and necessities hard to satisfy; and that even when they are satisfied, all he obtains is a state of painlessness, where nothing remains to him but abandonment to boredom. This is direct proof that existence has no
real value in itself; for what is boredom but the feeling of the emptiness of life? If life—the craving for which is the very essence of our being—were possessed of any positive intrinsic value, there would be no such thing as boredom at all: mere existence would satisfy us in itself, and we should want for nothing.”
Wow, these are spot on. Looks like it's time for me to read Schopenhauer.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- A Streetcar Named Desire - Revision Notes for OCR A Level English Literature
- Hi, please can someone mark my power and conflict GCSE essay? Thank you
- A thought for the New Year.
- Essay Love and relationships .
- jekyll and hyde duality essay,someone grade this or help me with what i can improve:)
- Different english question form
- Can someone correct my Macbeth essay
- jekyll and hyde
- How is the theme of supernatural presented in Macbeth? ESSAY FEEDBACK
- Revising
- GCSE English Literature Macbeth Ambition essay
- Resources for A-level English Lit OCR?
- 9ELO english lit and Lang
- Personal Statement help for English at University
- A-level English Literature Study Group 2023-2024
- Could someone mark my GCSE English Language question?
- "Trampled calmly" - Jekyll and Hyde
- A-level English Language and Literature (Edexcel)
- What should I do outside class while studying a text in class A-level English?
- A-level English Study Group
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
