I chose the "General Philosophy" category as I'm uncertain what category applies to this post. My guess is I'll be told what it is, in a kindly manner I hope. This OP will take up some space, so pass it by if you're bored by it.

In the old forum, I once wondered whether Latinbot would ever make an appearance. It didn't, and it hasn't here, the title of this post notwithstanding. The title is Latin, though, and this is its translation: "I was not, I was, I am not, I care not." It's a phrase said to have Epicurean origins or inspiration. It appeared on the grave monuments of followers of Epicurus in ancient times.

His followers took comfort in the fact that death was an end Lucretius praised Epicurus for saving us from the religious belief in the horrors of the afterlife. Before the time of Lucretius it seems the Greeks generally viewed the afterlife as being gloomy--a grey, dreary, shadowy life after death. From what I read, the Jews had no certainty of an afterlife as we think of it. Christianity, perhaps under the influence of Persian and other "oriental" religions, brought us the happy thought of eternal torment after death for the many, eternal bliss of some kind (which according to some would include the pleasure derived from observing others writhing in the flames of hell) for the blessed few. The so-called mystery religions promised a more happy afterlife to initiates and became more popular in the imperial period. I speak only of the ancient Mediterranean which I have some familiarity with, not the ancient or modern East, of which I know little or nothing.

The Stoics had no conception of an afterlife in which we survived as individuals. Some thought that we would be merged into the Divine Reason, surviving if at all for a short period of time. As far as we can tell, they felt no more horror at the thought of their ends than did the Epicureans.

This is all merely to say that, at least before the dominance of Christianity, there were many people who expected not to exist after their deaths and were unconcerned by it. I supect that such people exist even now.

In a different thread I asked some questions regarding Heidegger's musings on "the nothing" and our dread or anxiety, by which "the nothing" is encountered. That dread, as far as I can tell, either brings on "the nothing" or results from our understanding that "the nothing" or nonexistence awaits us; is our inevitable end. Perhaps both. Eventually, I encountered the kind of accusations I've come to expect whenever I criticize that great and worthy thinker, despite the fact that I was in that case actually trying to take him seriously--not an easy task for me. Even, perhaps, to understand what he was saying.

"The nothing" of Heidegger and "nothingness" of e.g. Sarte seem to concern many, and cause them to dread and it's clear that warning them of reification and pointing out that there's no thing to dread does little to assuage their concern, dread, anxiety or whatever form of disturbance they experience when they encounter "it" or because they encounter "it." And, I wonder why that's the case, given the fact that it clearly didn't concern many of the ancients (any maybe some of those that currently inhabit this place of woe).

I speculate that we hold ourselves, as individuals, in much greater regard than our ancestors held themselves. We think of ourselves as individuals more than they did. Think of the way we insist on "our rights" as individuals. Think of those who claim we have no duty to others, except perhaps the duty not to harm them directly. Consider the concern among certain of the religious with their own salvation.

This is to generalize, of course. But I think that one must love oneself a great deal to react with so strong an emotion as dread to the knowledge of pending nonexistance, though it's clear enough that we won't care when that comes to be.

Perhaps we wouldn't dread if we understood, better, our place as part of a vast universe (yes, that just might be a Stoic kind of concept). Just a thought or two, submitted for your consideration.