These are the very beginnings of what could one day become an entire essay or even book. I imagine periodic updates will occur.
On death and dying
The human population is certainly doing well these days, isn’t it? According to the “Current World Population” tracker on worldometer.com, the current population has hit 7.2 billion human beings, with over 500% of that growth occurring in the last 200 years and 300% occurring since 1960. (CITATION) It’s a boon time for us human beings right now. Between advanced health care, the securing of resources, and the development of multiple institutions to protect and elongate human life, things are very different now than they once were. Humans are living longer and longer and dying later and later. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, between the early 1900s and 2010, global average life expectancy jumped from approximately 31 to 67.2, an increase of over 100%. (CITATION) Contrast that against global average life expectancy between classical Greece and 2010, where in the span of only 2400 years (not very long cosmically) life expectancy increased by 120%.
But to what end? Leaving aside all questions of quality of life in later years , it is this paper’s purpose to explore the value of living in a death-resistant world, where mortality remains fictitious until old age or early accident, where prenatal and infant death has been nearly entirely squelched in the West, where people are no longer concerned with making it through the winter or the dry summer, where food sources are secured (for now) and the very purpose of being alive has been all but taken care of. What impact does living with a seemingly indefinite time table and very little actual, palpable threat do to the human psyche?
To clarify, for all intents and purposed when this paper refers to “the purpose of being alive,” the intention is not to make a philosophical statement but rather to refer to the inherent biological drive all living beings face to procreate and carry the species forward. There was a time that the continuation of any species was left relatively in question; a river could dry out and starve and entire species or subspecies in Latin America or Africa, another predator species could overhunt its prey to the point of extinction, etc. Even after the agrarian revolution only 10,000 years ago, wherein humans essentially staked their claim as “top of the food chain” and systematized it, there was still the threat of drought, famine, infections disease (see Black Plague), cold snap, and many other natural phenomena that could have wiped us out at any time. Physical death was once a very serious reality for all creatures on the planet but now, thanks to extreme human intervention, the powers of life and death have nearly been put into one species hands.
Through this, some species of both plant and animal life are deemed “worthy” and allowed to stay alive and others “unworthy” or “unnecessary” and resigned to slaughter at gunpoint, starvation, or general mistreatment. Take, for instance, the Grey Wolf. This species of wolf, now on the Endangered Species List, was once like any other species: untouched by man. It was uninterrupted in its growth and decay and allowed to live and die according to nature’s pattern, which cannot be fully quantified (this is the same pattern by which a tree will grow or not grow, according to time, season, and circumstance). However, in recent years the Gray Wolf has been threatened by human encroachment on their habitat as well as farmers killing them due to occasional livestock predation.(FOOTNOTE) Similar examples can be seen in West Africa, where the West African Lion population, whose DNA is unique to its region and species, has been reduced to 35,000 members. (CITATION)
35,000. Imagine a world with only 35,000 humans left. Or dogs, or cats, or horses, or songbirds. Would we not fight tenaciously to keep those things we deem precious or beautiful alive? Why, then, has there been an unconscious decision made to exterminate those animals we do not find of some immediate value? And why are none of us doing something about it? Here’s the long and the short of it: if a species is meant to go, then it is meant to (much like humans will, one day, no longer walk this earth) but why does it have to be sacrificed to a shortsighted, egoic, and man-made institution like a new housing development or cattle farm?
The thinking that causes this type of extinction problem is the same thinking which creates the mono-cropping problems in large agrarian societies (the US, Canada, most of the world). According to Wikipedia, “Monocropping is the agricultural practice of growing a single crop year after year on the same land, in the absence of rotation through other crops. Corn, soybeans, and wheat are three common crops often grown using monocropping techniques.“ The article further states:
“While economically a very efficient system, allowing for specialization in equipment and crop production, monocropping is also controversial, as it can damage the soil ecology (including depletion or reduction in diversity of soil nutrients) and provide an unbuffered niche for parasitic species, increasing crop vulnerability to opportunistic insects, plants, and microorganisms.”
There is a sort of selectivism, a picking and choosing about the human mind (not humans themselves, however, as we are not the contents of our minds) which cuts reality up into little pieces and is incapable of seeing the whole. This fragmentation of reality creates shortsighted and selfish aims which involve one side losing for the other to win. Think of slavery or the disenfranchisement of anyone not a white male in the West. One group came to power (by hook or by crook) and determined that 1) that power was something worth keeping, 2) the way to stay there was to terminate all immediate threats. Thus we had the subjugation of women, of other races, of homosexuals and all those deemed as “other” to a difference-perceiving mind. Well here we are, 10,000 or so years later and we see where this has gotten us: civil unrest, a constant involvement in low-grade pandemic conflict, a crumbling economy, and a planet being killed all to attain some momentary feeling of happiness or security. While there have been many incredible advancements made through our death-fearing society, many of them have come back around to trap us rather than liberate us into the fullest experience of life there is.
It is this author’s belief that society was created as a bastion against death. Going back to the earliest, even pre-human, civilizations, moving in packs has always been preferred. (EVIDENCE). Moving in numbers helps stave off threats while procreation can occur happily and freely within the well-functioning micro-society. Post agrarian revolution, however, nomadic lifestyles died out and people no longer had to move in their small pods to ensure survival. Groups could break away to develop as they saw fit. Some developed more than others, and ended up possessing large amounts of land and, more importantly, food and water. Out of this came feudalism: those who “possessed” the land were in power and created rules and structures to maintain a harmonious balance within said society. As a disclaimer, this is an history of the evolution of Anglo-Saxon and Western society which has now grown to dominate nearly 100% of the world. Clearly, different forms of societal living were occurring in different places all over the world, though they all had a similar conceit of staying together and strengthening through numbers the ability to keep death at bay for as long as possible.
The intolerance of death is a reasonably new phenomena, though I believe it is one which will be quickly broken.
On death and dying
The human population is certainly doing well these days, isn’t it? According to the “Current World Population” tracker on worldometer.com, the current population has hit 7.2 billion human beings, with over 500% of that growth occurring in the last 200 years and 300% occurring since 1960. (CITATION) It’s a boon time for us human beings right now. Between advanced health care, the securing of resources, and the development of multiple institutions to protect and elongate human life, things are very different now than they once were. Humans are living longer and longer and dying later and later. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, between the early 1900s and 2010, global average life expectancy jumped from approximately 31 to 67.2, an increase of over 100%. (CITATION) Contrast that against global average life expectancy between classical Greece and 2010, where in the span of only 2400 years (not very long cosmically) life expectancy increased by 120%.
But to what end? Leaving aside all questions of quality of life in later years , it is this paper’s purpose to explore the value of living in a death-resistant world, where mortality remains fictitious until old age or early accident, where prenatal and infant death has been nearly entirely squelched in the West, where people are no longer concerned with making it through the winter or the dry summer, where food sources are secured (for now) and the very purpose of being alive has been all but taken care of. What impact does living with a seemingly indefinite time table and very little actual, palpable threat do to the human psyche?
To clarify, for all intents and purposed when this paper refers to “the purpose of being alive,” the intention is not to make a philosophical statement but rather to refer to the inherent biological drive all living beings face to procreate and carry the species forward. There was a time that the continuation of any species was left relatively in question; a river could dry out and starve and entire species or subspecies in Latin America or Africa, another predator species could overhunt its prey to the point of extinction, etc. Even after the agrarian revolution only 10,000 years ago, wherein humans essentially staked their claim as “top of the food chain” and systematized it, there was still the threat of drought, famine, infections disease (see Black Plague), cold snap, and many other natural phenomena that could have wiped us out at any time. Physical death was once a very serious reality for all creatures on the planet but now, thanks to extreme human intervention, the powers of life and death have nearly been put into one species hands.
Through this, some species of both plant and animal life are deemed “worthy” and allowed to stay alive and others “unworthy” or “unnecessary” and resigned to slaughter at gunpoint, starvation, or general mistreatment. Take, for instance, the Grey Wolf. This species of wolf, now on the Endangered Species List, was once like any other species: untouched by man. It was uninterrupted in its growth and decay and allowed to live and die according to nature’s pattern, which cannot be fully quantified (this is the same pattern by which a tree will grow or not grow, according to time, season, and circumstance). However, in recent years the Gray Wolf has been threatened by human encroachment on their habitat as well as farmers killing them due to occasional livestock predation.(FOOTNOTE) Similar examples can be seen in West Africa, where the West African Lion population, whose DNA is unique to its region and species, has been reduced to 35,000 members. (CITATION)
35,000. Imagine a world with only 35,000 humans left. Or dogs, or cats, or horses, or songbirds. Would we not fight tenaciously to keep those things we deem precious or beautiful alive? Why, then, has there been an unconscious decision made to exterminate those animals we do not find of some immediate value? And why are none of us doing something about it? Here’s the long and the short of it: if a species is meant to go, then it is meant to (much like humans will, one day, no longer walk this earth) but why does it have to be sacrificed to a shortsighted, egoic, and man-made institution like a new housing development or cattle farm?
The thinking that causes this type of extinction problem is the same thinking which creates the mono-cropping problems in large agrarian societies (the US, Canada, most of the world). According to Wikipedia, “Monocropping is the agricultural practice of growing a single crop year after year on the same land, in the absence of rotation through other crops. Corn, soybeans, and wheat are three common crops often grown using monocropping techniques.“ The article further states:
“While economically a very efficient system, allowing for specialization in equipment and crop production, monocropping is also controversial, as it can damage the soil ecology (including depletion or reduction in diversity of soil nutrients) and provide an unbuffered niche for parasitic species, increasing crop vulnerability to opportunistic insects, plants, and microorganisms.”
There is a sort of selectivism, a picking and choosing about the human mind (not humans themselves, however, as we are not the contents of our minds) which cuts reality up into little pieces and is incapable of seeing the whole. This fragmentation of reality creates shortsighted and selfish aims which involve one side losing for the other to win. Think of slavery or the disenfranchisement of anyone not a white male in the West. One group came to power (by hook or by crook) and determined that 1) that power was something worth keeping, 2) the way to stay there was to terminate all immediate threats. Thus we had the subjugation of women, of other races, of homosexuals and all those deemed as “other” to a difference-perceiving mind. Well here we are, 10,000 or so years later and we see where this has gotten us: civil unrest, a constant involvement in low-grade pandemic conflict, a crumbling economy, and a planet being killed all to attain some momentary feeling of happiness or security. While there have been many incredible advancements made through our death-fearing society, many of them have come back around to trap us rather than liberate us into the fullest experience of life there is.
It is this author’s belief that society was created as a bastion against death. Going back to the earliest, even pre-human, civilizations, moving in packs has always been preferred. (EVIDENCE). Moving in numbers helps stave off threats while procreation can occur happily and freely within the well-functioning micro-society. Post agrarian revolution, however, nomadic lifestyles died out and people no longer had to move in their small pods to ensure survival. Groups could break away to develop as they saw fit. Some developed more than others, and ended up possessing large amounts of land and, more importantly, food and water. Out of this came feudalism: those who “possessed” the land were in power and created rules and structures to maintain a harmonious balance within said society. As a disclaimer, this is an history of the evolution of Anglo-Saxon and Western society which has now grown to dominate nearly 100% of the world. Clearly, different forms of societal living were occurring in different places all over the world, though they all had a similar conceit of staying together and strengthening through numbers the ability to keep death at bay for as long as possible.
The intolerance of death is a reasonably new phenomena, though I believe it is one which will be quickly broken.