Random Thoughts
Quote:
The art of living well and the art of dying well are one.
- Epicurus
- Epicurus
Is it merely because of the fact that if you live well then you are bound to die well?
Or does it have anything to do with how Epicurus viewed death?
Allow me to go into more depth about how Epicurus viewed death. He believed that we should not fear death for the following reason:
Death is of no concern to us, for when we exist, death does not. And when it comes, we no longer exist.
Therefore, both life and death exist but only separate from one another. We can only experience life when we exist, and only when we no longer exist can we experience death.
But can we experience when we no longer exist? If we can experience when we exist then the opposite must be true when we do not exist. Is this cycle of coming in and out of existance significant on a larger scale?
Before Birth = Do not Exist
Birth = Exist
Life = Exist
Death = Do not Exist
Do not Exist -> Exist -> Do not Exist
Which could also be interpreted as:
Do not Experience -> Experience -> Do not Experience
Arthur Schopenhauer believes that we go through this cycle everyday of our lives. When we wake up in the morning it's like "Birth" we go through the day "Life", and then we go to sleep "Death". Do we really only exist in that brief period of time?
Is this why living well is one with dying well. If we have a good day then we are going to have a good night because they aren't really separate from one another as we think them to be.
Existance and Non-Existance are then part of a category called "one". They can't exist without one another; therefore, existance and non-existance coexist.
Total Comments 15
Comments
-
haha were you on drugs when you wrote this? :PPosted 08-02-08 at 08:07 AM by catmmm
-
Simply lost in my own deep analysis of my thought
Posted 08-02-08 at 08:34 AM by mega_option101
Updated 08-02-08 at 08:47 AM by mega_option101 -
i'm going to start calling you silly german french canadian philosopher nowPosted 08-02-08 at 10:21 AM by catmmm
-
Believe me, many people, if not all, contemplate these sort of things at some point in their lives. I'm not going to elaborate too much as it would definately scare the kiddies. Suffice to say I didn't find an answer in religion, instead I found it through my own self council after a very long period of thought.
The way I look at it now is considering how big the universe is, and how many life forms have ever been born, existed, and died, the fact that I ever existed at all is a comforting thought.
Besides, eternal bliss in "heaven" would get boring after a couple of weeks, never mind eternity. I'll take the dirt nap.Posted 08-09-08 at 10:00 AM by t4ct1c47
-
If a tree falls in a forest where there is no one there to hear it, does it still make noise?
Posted 08-09-08 at 03:08 PM by mega_option101
-
Yes. Science can prove it, it'll always make a noise.Quote:Originally Posted by mega_option101If a tree falls in a forest where there is no one there to hear it, does it still make noise?
If there is no one to hear, then just leave a sound recorder or something to check =P.Posted 08-12-08 at 10:45 PM by xShishy
-
You can't leave a sound recorder everywhere though
Posted 08-23-08 at 01:35 PM by mega_option101
-
interestingPosted 10-23-08 at 01:35 AM by sycur
-
Of course it still makes a noise.
But existence and non-existence don't co-exist because co-existance is from the latin cum (co) which means with, so there is no existence in non existence therefore it is not one with something that exists because non-existence simply is not.
The thought of them being one proceeds from the notion of the potentiality of something to not be; thus we can say in a sense that something "co-exists" with non-being only by abstraction and in no way by substance or being and only because it has a abstract relation to nothingness because all things were brought out from nothing, except God of course.Posted 11-29-08 at 07:56 PM by Atomagenesis
Updated 11-29-08 at 08:00 PM by Atomagenesis (stuff) -
Can you hear me?
Posted 11-29-08 at 08:00 PM by mega_option101
-
No, but I don't see how that would change anything.Posted 11-29-08 at 08:04 PM by Atomagenesis
-
In my opinion, existence and non-existence have to co-exist. When you have existence you cannot possibly have non-existence but that does not mean that it's not there... The reason I mentioned that they co-exist is because when you are you exist and when you are no longer you are non-existant. I think that there is non-existence in existence much how there is existence in non-existence (if that makes any sense).Quote:But existence and non-existence don't co-exist because co-existance is from the latin cum (co) which means with, so there is no existence in non existence therefore it is not one with something that exists because non-existence simply is not.
The thought of them being one proceeds from the notion of the potentiality of something to not be; thus we can say in a sense that something "co-exists" with non-being only by abstraction and in no way by substance or being and only because it has a abstract relation to nothingness because all things were brought out from nothing, except God of course.Posted 11-30-08 at 11:34 AM by mega_option101
-
I agree with you partly, being a philosophy major I get to talk about this stuff all the time, which is kinda fun.
Yes, when you are, that is, when you are being, in act, you are existing, and in act just means that you be. When you are no longer you no longer exist is true of course, but what about the soul? I don't know if you believe in the soul but there is obviously something existing immaterially that causes all things to be and exist, we can't say that matter causes things to be because that would presuppose matter as creating existence when we know that matter cannot per se bring things to be out of nothing or non-existence, matter can only change objects.
I see what you are saying in your last sentence, at least I think, because all things that are were brought out of nothingness into being and became something they have that tendency to not be, and they are held in being, so in a way you can say that we are participants of non-being because we are finite, which of course God is the exception to this.Posted 12-04-08 at 07:07 PM by Atomagenesis
-
InterestingPosted 03-18-09 at 12:27 PM by Sin100
-
An idealist argument of:
"If a tree falls in a forest where there is no one there to hear it, does it still make noise?"
1. We perceive such things as trees and noise.
2. We perceive only ideas and collections of them.
3. Ideas (simple or complex) cannot exist unperceived.
4. Therefore, a tree in a forest that falls cannot exist or make noise unperceived.
EnjoyPosted 04-28-09 at 10:58 AM by mega_option101
