Does Death Have A Meaning?

TheMadFool

Everybody asks about the meaning of life. The answer is far from clear. It appears then that life lacks an objective purpose and we're free to assign any meaning to it - we can choose and pick whatever we want our life to be.

Asking ''what is the meanig of life?" with objective intent hasn't produced a definitive answer. Once upon a time God filled this existential vacuum but that's become useless under the lens of rationality.

In short, life has no meaning.

Given the above, I think it'll be fruitful to frame the same question for the antithesis of life, death; hoping to indirectly answer the question of the meaning of death.

What is the meaning of death?

From a pragmatic standpoint, death clears up the limited habitat, making space for newer, younger, better suited designs to replace the outmoded, old life forms. For life, as a whole, to survive, genetic mutation is absolutely necessary - the environment changes with time and life must adapt and the only way to do so is through floating innumerable different mutations, a few of which make the cut and perpetuate the species.

Also, death, in terms of predator-prey dynamics, weeds out the weak and sick. Again, death has an overall positive effect on the ecology.

Philosophically, some prefer a finite existence for the opposite, immortality, is equated with infinite boredom.

So, death has a meaning. Its purpose is what I've outlined above.

Does this fact, that death has a meaning, alleviate the anxiety born from the lack of meaning in life?

We may not live a life of purpose but we die for one.

Andrew4Handel

newer, younger, better suited designs — TheMadFool

That appears to be a teleological claim. Biological mechanisms are unconscious. Only conscious entities can be aware that they are surviving or have functions.

In my opinion consciousness is the only thing that gives anything value or meaning.

Rich

Life=>evolution of consciousness=>creativity+exploration+learning

Death=>opportunity for conscious rebirth=>new canvas for consciousness

Rich

That appears to be a teleological claim. Biological mechanisms are unconscious. Only conscious entities can be aware that they are surviving or have functions.

In my opinion consciousness is the only thing that gives anything value or meaning. — Andrew4Handel

Yes, one cannot rely on a consciousness in order to deny it.

TheMadFool

↪Andrew4Handel

I agree. It's consciousness that creates meaning. So, how does this bear on the issue of death? In different words, does death have a meaning?

Death does have a meaning. That that meaning is teleological further consolidates the view that death has purpose. So, unlike life, empty of any objective meaning, death has objective meaning - a universal purpose that extends from the microscopic to the gigantic.

Does this fact not comfort a person seeking meaning in life?

↪Rich

That's a good point. Seeing death as a opportunity for a clean canvas, a new beginning, is another point in favor of my view that death has meaning.

So, it should relieve the existential angst!?

Rich

So, it should relieve the existential angst!? — TheMadFool

One can analogize life and death to a painting that one doesn't like and wishes to do over. One covers the old painting with a layer of white paint and starts again. However, it is not a complete restart. Something was learned in the previous effort. This memory of this evolutionary learning process remains.

Harry Hindu

Does Death Have A Meaning?

Go ask the meaning-is-use crowd. They'd say that the meaning of death is it's use.

I say that meaning is a causal relationship. To ask what the meaning of something is, is to ask about causation.

The way you posed the question seems to ask if there is purpose to one's death, which is also asking about causation - just reverse causation. You are asking if something in the future causes death.

Cavacava

Over the eons before me nothing mattered, over the eons when I am gone nothing will matter.
Means:
I'll try to make the best of the time I've got.

Beebert

A christian would say that death is the result of a sickness in the soul; the seperation from God, the step out of being into constant becoming. But also that death has been overcome in Christ. Most people find that silly today and worship only the naturalistic point of view(which is though at least as silly IMO). Anyway, no matter what, the only real philosophical problem is the problem of death. God isn't useless because of rationality. It is just that man chooses not to think about deep questions anymore. Sure, our obsession with rationality "killed" God, but in reality it didn't. Either God is or isn't. Science has not in the least disproved his existence, because science only trusts the senses. And if the common man would have been more knowable about philosophers like Plato, Augustine and Kant, they would know that it is ridiculous to dismiss God just because one trusts in positivism. Life has no meaning? What does that mean? That conclusion is meaningless in it self. Its opposite too though. Anyway, one thing is for sure; death is the problem of everything. The "rational" person says that life is meaningless. Why? Because of death. The christian says that life is meaningful? Why, because they have a solution to the problem of death.

deletedmemberwy

Everybody asks about the meaning of life. The answer is far from clear. It appears then that life lacks an objective purpose and we're free to assign any meaning to it - we can choose and pick whatever we want our life to be.

Asking ''what is the meaning of life?" with objective intent hasn't produced a definitive answer. Once upon a time God filled this existential vacuum but that's become useless under the lens of rationality.

In short, life has no meaning.

Given the above, I think it'll be fruitful to frame the same question for the antithesis of life, death; hoping to indirectly answer the question of the meaning of death.

What is the meaning of death?

From a pragmatic standpoint, death clears up the limited habitat, making space for newer, younger, better suited designs to replace the outmoded, old life forms. For life, as a whole, to survive, genetic mutation is absolutely necessary - the environment changes with time and life must adapt and the only way to do so is through floating innumerable different mutations, a few of which make the cut and perpetuate the species.

Also, death, in terms of predator-prey dynamics, weeds out the weak and sick. Again, death has an overall positive effect on the ecology.

Philosophically, some prefer a finite existence for the opposite, immortality, is equated with infinite boredom.

So, death has a meaning. Its purpose is what I've outlined above.

Does this fact, that death has a meaning, alleviate the anxiety born from the lack of meaning in life?

We may not live a life of purpose but we die for one. — TheMadFool

Life may be meaningless for you, but you have no right to say that it is meaningless for anyone else. As for declaring belief of God to be irrational, and therefore saying that any purpose one may draw from serving and believing in a superior being is not valid is severely limiting to potential answers. Without believing in something greater, I find it natural that one can't find a purpose to live, because there really is no purpose to live.
Death is merely the lack of life. It is like studying darkness, which is the lack of light. It is very hard to study the lack of something.
As for genetic mutations helping life to reach a higher level, I had to laugh. This has been disproved many times over in real science. Mutations are the decrease and distorting of useful information, they have never been known in modern science to create new useful information.
Death does not always allow the "survival" of the fittest in today's world. Murder from weapons equals the playing field pretty quickly. The weak can have power to kill the strong physically now. Anyway, how would you define weak? How would you define "strong"? Some people are small, but capable of producing nuclear weapons. Would they be stronger than, say, a professional hockey player? Who is weeding out who here?

TheMadFool

↪Rich

That's a fine way to look at life. Genetic memories transfer from parent to child. This isn't possible without death. Also, death has the additional function of culling the herd of weaklings - genetic misfits - whose survival would be bad for the herd's overall welfare. All that brings me to the main point - death does have objective meaning. Ironically, the questioner of meaning, life, has no objective meaning.

The way you posed the question seems to ask if there is purpose to one's death, which is also asking about causation - just reverse causation. You are asking if something in the future causes death. — Harry Hindu

I don't know what you mean.

↪Cavacava

Death is the arch enemy of meaning, so far as life is concerned. It destroys everything - loved ones, memories, cherished possessions, etc. - that life can derive meaning from. That implies a freedom to create our own meaning for life. However, such meanings pale in comparison to having an objective meaning. Such self-contrived meanings are like counterfeit money - may work but is actually worthless.

Yet, the antithesis of life, death, has objective meaning as outlined above.

Anyway, one thing is for sure; death is the problem of everything. The "rational" person says that life is meaningless. Why? Because of death. The christian says that life is meaningful? Why, because they have a solution to the problem of death. — Beebert

Please read above.

Life may be meaningless for you, but you have no right to say that it is meaningless for anyone else — Lone Wolf

I'm interested in objective meaning.

Rich

That's a fine way to look at life. Genetic memories transfer from parent to child. This isn't possible without death. Also, death has the additional function of culling the herd of weaklings - genetic misfits - whose survival would be bad for the herd's overall welfare. All that brings me to the main point - death does have objective meaning. Ironically, the questioner of meaning, life, has no objective meaning. — TheMadFool

A personally do not subscribe to the notion of gene transfer for any number of reasons most of all it merely squishes everything human into a lowly gene and makes genes more human than humans. But beyond this, the theory leaves almost all questions unanswered including how does everything human and life itself spring from a gene?

My preference, and for the reasons Rupert Sheldrake articulates, is for the concept of morphic resonance fields (a type of memory) which are imbued into the universe (holographically) and are hierarchical in nature. One might consider life forms a form of memory characterized by these fields which on one hand are sort of habitual patterns but at the same time are are constantly evolving.

Noble Dust

What is the meaning of death?

From a pragmatic standpoint, death clears up the limited habitat, making space for newer, younger, better suited designs to replace the outmoded, old life forms. For life, as a whole, to survive, genetic mutation is absolutely necessary - the environment changes with time and life must adapt and the only way to do so is through floating innumerable different mutations, a few of which make the cut and perpetuate the species.

Also, death, in terms of predator-prey dynamics, weeds out the weak and sick. Again, death has an overall positive effect on the ecology. — TheMadFool

But you're just indirectly describing a "meaning of life" here; you're assuming that clearing "up the limited habitat, 'making space for newer, younger, better suited designs", that life as a whole should survive, are all things that are predicated on a meaning. Why should life continue to propagate itself? What's the meaning behind the will for survival? You're still really just talking about an assumed evolutionary soft "meaning" here.

positive effect on the ecology. — TheMadFool

For instance, why is this positive? What predicates positivity in this situation?

deletedmemberwy

Genetic memories transfer from parent to child. This isn't possible without death. Also, death has the additional function of culling the herd of weaklings - genetic misfits - whose survival would be bad for the herd's overall welfare. — TheMadFool

I presume this to be an attempted reference to epigenetics?

I'm interested in objective meaning. — TheMadFool

That, my friend, does not seem likely to have an answer that you will like.

Harry Hindu

The way you posed the question seems to ask if there is purpose to one's death, which is also asking about causation - just reverse causation. You are asking if something in the future causes death. — Harry Hindu

I don't know what you mean. — TheMadFool

What I mean is that, if you are asking if death has a purpose then you are

1) implying determinism

and

2) implying that events in the future are what imbue death with meaning (like death being a "door" you have to go through in order to continue your existence in a different form beyond death).

Terrapin Station

Terrapin Station

But no, there are no objective purposes/meanings.

Does Death Have A Meaning?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions