Wtf is up with people and dying?

History Mirror wrote:Wooster gets it.

LOL
Might have something to do with growing up in Crys's preferred communist utopia where you had to watch over your shoulder in every waking moment.
Might sound paradoxical, but constant situational paranoia (or call it 'instinctual alertness'?) might be a good asset to bring down fear to a rational & controllable level / eliminate the irrational (uncontrollable) elements of it?

some form of communism is just one of my ideas wooster...

lately, I've been leaning toward a stateless global society of small, self-sufficient and autonomously governed 19th century villages.

but anyway, I just wanted to clarify my position. don't intent to derail the thread!

History Mirror wrote:I realize this may get a bunch of idiots trying to prove who fears death less.

That is NOT my point.

What I cannot understand is simply, WHY DO PEOPLE FEAR IT!? It controls SO MUCH of their day to day lives!

Why the ###$ would I hand my wallet over to someone just because they have a gun to my face? How Do i know they even have the balls to do it? Does no one.. think to maybe distract/hit gun? The amount of "Muggings" i hear about it absurd. No one ever fights back.

Why? "Oh thats how you end up dead". Are you sure? How would you know.. you've never done it!

I really fail to understand why people care so much. Wtf is worth caring enough about in this world to not embrace death when it comes?>

Firstly I don't fear death but I appreciate my life. I like the feel of a breeze and sunshine on my face. I like learning about science and so many other things. So I therefore don't want my life to end.

So if I had the option to essentially pay £100 to carry on with my life then yes I would.

However at the same time if the person held it to close to me or looked away momentarily and I felt I had a reasonable chance to overcome them then I would try.

People fear the unknown generally and nobody knows what happens after death.

seemingly normal wrote:

History Mirror wrote:I realize this may get a bunch of idiots trying to prove who fears death less.

That is NOT my point.

What I cannot understand is simply, WHY DO PEOPLE FEAR IT!? It controls SO MUCH of their day to day lives!

Why the ###$ would I hand my wallet over to someone just because they have a gun to my face? How Do i know they even have the balls to do it? Does no one.. think to maybe distract/hit gun? The amount of "Muggings" i hear about it absurd. No one ever fights back.

Why? "Oh thats how you end up dead". Are you sure? How would you know.. you've never done it!

I really fail to understand why people care so much. Wtf is worth caring enough about in this world to not embrace death when it comes?>

Firstly I don't fear death but I appreciate my life. I like the feel of a breeze and sunshine on my face. I like learning about science and so many other things. So I therefore don't want my life to end.

So if I had the option to essentially pay £100 to carry on with my life then yes I would.

However at the same time if the person held it to close to me or looked away momentarily and I felt I had a reasonable chance to overcome them then I would try.

People fear the unknown generally and nobody knows what happens after death.

Thank you for restating mine and others posts in an attempt to establish your new account on this forum.

Try adding something new next time.

crystal_richardson_ wrote:some form of communism is just one of my ideas wooster...

lately, I've been leaning toward a stateless global society of small, self-sufficient and autonomously governed 19th century villages.

but anyway, I just wanted to clarify my position. don't intent to derail the thread!

Even worse.

Personally I think you like communism just because you want to be hit with a hammer, honestly.

History Mirror wrote:

seemingly normal wrote:

History Mirror wrote:I realize this may get a bunch of idiots trying to prove who fears death less.

That is NOT my point.

What I cannot understand is simply, WHY DO PEOPLE FEAR IT!? It controls SO MUCH of their day to day lives!

Why the ###$ would I hand my wallet over to someone just because they have a gun to my face? How Do i know they even have the balls to do it? Does no one.. think to maybe distract/hit gun? The amount of "Muggings" i hear about it absurd. No one ever fights back.

Why? "Oh thats how you end up dead". Are you sure? How would you know.. you've never done it!

I really fail to understand why people care so much. Wtf is worth caring enough about in this world to not embrace death when it comes?>

Firstly I don't fear death but I appreciate my life. I like the feel of a breeze and sunshine on my face. I like learning about science and so many other things. So I therefore don't want my life to end.

So if I had the option to essentially pay £100 to carry on with my life then yes I would.

However at the same time if the person held it to close to me or looked away momentarily and I felt I had a reasonable chance to overcome them then I would try.

People fear the unknown generally and nobody knows what happens after death.

Thank you for restating mine and others posts in an attempt to establish your new account on this forum.

Try adding something new next time.

Sometimes there is nothing new to be added. Quite often people have the same opinion on a topic.

Didn't post the same opinion to try and establish myself however. I had an account here before but became inactive and can't even remember the name of it now.

@OP
I think people think they have something worthwhile to loose, like their life, which is why they fear death. The degree of this fear varies, but I think it is pretty much universal to some degree, even for those that do not recognize it. Even just having your blood pumping in some situations means something. The difference is how people react to it, which varies a lot. Some do nothing, some flee, some fight it. The amount of importance it ends up having also varies a lot. For the normal person, it is very important, not just to avoid death, but to avoid "not living", which means not achieving what they think they or anybody should achieve.

crystal_richardson_ wrote:lately, I've been leaning toward a stateless global society of small, self-sufficient and autonomously governed 19th century villages.

Now you're making sense Crys
Only I'd extend it to small to medium-sized towns as well.
Now, what to do with the vast herds of globalized urban proletariat / middle-class / rich? (Other than feeding them to the wolves & polar bears )

crystal_richardson_ wrote:some form of communism is just one of my ideas wooster...

lately, I've been leaning toward a stateless global society of small, self-sufficient and autonomously governed 19th century villages.

but anyway, I just wanted to clarify my position. don't intent to derail the thread!

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Next stop will be anarcho-syndicalism crystal.

Hope a later day Genghis Khan doesn't turn up, otherwise you're shish kebab.

it's not like that Mac.

I have been vacillating between some form of communism and a stateless world of little villages for many years.

there are pros and cons to each,

with communism I just don't like the idea of governments (or anyone for that matter) having that much power in society. it's too prone to corruption and on a large scale is too impersonal because people are basically working, and then handing over their contribution to the state - they don't see where is goes, or who is getting it. and because society would continue to be modern and large and complex, presuming the motivation in people to work and provide for someone at the other side of the country who they don't really know personally is problematic.

the following idea, however, is based on the assumption that intimate relationships and regular association and contact together (with the same people, from birth to death) are sufficient motivation for people to work and provide for each other without needing the profit motive.

How do you increase intimacy, regular association and contact between people? Make society smaller!

I think a stateless world of little villages or medium sized towns is the answer.

- it gives humans their freedom to regulate production back (they no longer have to produce for an impersonal entity, but for their town, their family, their neighbour, and this strengthens social bonds and motivates people to work and provide for each other at a pace they themselves set without outside pressure and the pressure to produce MORE than the village itself needs)

- everyone has access to high status occupations because everyone's contribution is needed and, importantly, everyone sees the results of, and gets sincere appreciation for their contribution daily ("Joe I just love these boots you made for me!...."This bread is great Karen"). And work and social life are intertwined, not separate. So work is not seen as aversive, but rather a chance to socialize (you would actually be allowed to talk on the job ) and be with people who will not leave and go away to find work some where else. Work in modern society in contrast is very alienating and produces loneliness, and the time off (if you get it) is so minuscule that it doesn't really make up for or satisfy the social and emotional needs which are not been met at work.

these are obviously only a few points but basically the idea is if work is an inevitable and unavoidable part of life, then work should be made as enjoyable as possible, which means giving everyone control over their labour, situating it in a social context, and seeing where the products of one's labour goes, among other things...

in the 19th century style villages/towns... (however, in contract to 19th century history, I want to dissolve the state and contributions to outside cities or countries altogether so that these villages are entirely self-sufficient and autonomously governed making them EVEN BETTER) ...work is basically fun and rewarding because many human needs are being met and one is basically free to produce what they want, how they want to, and at a comfortable pace. and for women, motherhood would not be isolated and lonely like it is in modern society (it would be inextricably social; mothers would take care of children TOGETHER; it would be a community thing)

in modern society work is sh*t. the idea is you play AFTER work. WORK HARD, PLAY HARD or whatever that stupid saying is.. <-- that is the mentality of most people today. work and fun (or reward) are SEPARATE. But this is stupid and far from the reality because most people have so little time to 'play' - which is usually limited to being some kind of consumer anyway or sitting in front of a computer, rather then real wholesome play. really all they are doing is sh*tty impersonal, unrewarding, frustrating, etc work, eating, and then sleeping. it's awful, lonely, and people in modern society are basically already dead.

in short, most people's lives in modern society suck and the one's who deny this are just avoiding depressive realism. most people think they can't really do anything about their situation so they've adjusted their attitudes and tell themselves that though life is sh*tty, it couldn't be any better so might as well laugh things off (Obsidian ) or see the glass as half full or whatever defence mechanisms they use to keep their spirits up.



I know people don't like being told that their way of life is wrong and society tends to react strongly to such people because they are a threat to social order and all that jazz but when or if the opportunity comes to change how we live toward something like this ^ I really hope you guys jump on board.