I havent been following this conversation but I would note
that I almost died in Intensive Care from MRSA a few years
ago. My recollection of my mind at the time was that I wasnt
frightened at all. I was just floating away in a very relaxed
manner and at peace with myself. The doctors had written me
off but by some miracle I recovered. Death is nothing to be
afraid of when you are there.
Douglas Clark, Bath, England mailto: [log in to unmask]
Lynx: Poetry from Bath .......... http://www.bath.ac.uk/~exxdgdc/lynx.html
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, david.bircumshaw wrote:
> Martin
>
> indeed, this is a tricky subject. My impression was, and I say this partly
> on the basis that the listee sent the post in question b-c to me last
> Saturday, as he couldn't get through, was that he was talking about the
> impact of that notion as a new idea, which, one must admit, is an
> uncomfortable thought.
>
> Now whatever philosophical sophistications I might pretend to, I must
> concede that, at the moment of death, however much I search for appropriate
> references, if conscious, I might well be terrified out of my mind, despite
> my theories of the self.
>
> My ramshackle musings wander about ideas of this being like so 'objectively'
> but not so 'experientially'. They are very threadbare thoughts though.
>
> Anyhow, I don't want to get 'heavy' about a very heavy subject, enuff now
>
> Dave
>
>
> David Bircumshaw
>
> Leicester, England
>
> Home Page
>
> A Chide's Alphabet
>
> Painting Without Numbers
>
> www.paintstuff.20m.com/index.htm
>
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.bircumshaw/index.htm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin J. Walker" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 6:04 PM
> Subject: Re: FW: AI's Elegies
>
>
> > These are very knotty questions which are not as simple as saying "the
> self
> > is an illusion, amen." For Heidegger, as I understand it, Being (das Sein)
> > is indefinable by being-there (Dasein), which all persons have in common:
> > their selves are constituted by that community & their language (based on
> > understanding,Verstehen, plus Rede, speech), both of which also imply the
> > project (Entwurf) & the care (Sorge), the latter comprehending the past &
> > present as the condition & the future as the field of self-realization
> which
> > must end in death, thus my dread (Angst) until I affirm death as my most
> > real possibility, thus devaluing in a sense all the projects etc of
> > Being-there & attaining authentic existence, though Being is always
> far-off.
> > The transcendent Self of the Upanishads is actually closer to Being than
> > Being-there, thus only a logical step forward (and a lot of meditation)
> was
> > necessary for Gautama to realize _sambodhi_ as the illumination that
> > transcends the object-subject of normal consciousness: this results in
> > _nirvana_, in which the distinctions of the normal self have vanished.
> > Thus in both philosophies the normal self is something to be transcended
> as
> > not finally constitutive of Being, but it is hardly a simple illusion.
> > Heidegger would presumably frown on any belief in survival after death as
> > inauthentic.
> > I can't understand why you find the implications of non-self <a bit
> scary>,
> > as death (nothingness) will relieve you of your self in any case, a much
> > scarier consideration I would have thought; I myself shall be quite happy
> to
> > wander around the Bardo or various reincarnations before being relieved of
> > self, if death is not the end. Amen.
> > Martin
> >
>
|