For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.
[Note: This is a continuation of the comment streams that began in The Winding Path – 137. I’m presenting individually isolated conversations for the sake of legibility,]
Rust Cohle – “Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.”
Only if you believe that stamps don’t exist.
Rust Cohle – “Wrong. But keep spouting nonsense if you like.
I don’t know, it’s a pretty subtle point. Perhaps you should study on it.
If you are satisfied then I won’t cross YOUR statement out. Especially since it’s so “scientific” and all
Rust Cohle – “If you can offer a refutation of terror management theory as it applies to religion, you’re welcome to do so.”
Per recommended TED talk by Steven Cave on Terror Management Theory. (Death and the Biases we employ to fend it off)
1. Existential Elevator
5. Rationalization – “The fear of death is natural but it is not rational.” – Epicurus or “Death is not an event in Life: We do not live to experience death” – Ludwig Wittgenstein (Bias of Steven Cave)
6. Enlightenment – Our identification with an abstracted sense of self, a creation of the mind, is an illusion. A construct. An imitation of the Eternal Self.
The body and the mind die. If at that point we still think that we are the historical personalities know as us. Then ….well … something changes. Per usual.
In the bloom of enlightenment however, recognizing Self as One. We know “the face of our parents before they were born”. (Call it “The Void” if you must.)
In the mean time.
“Cultivation of harmlessness, … discerning right and wrong. Reverence, Nobility, Awe, Joy.” (Bias of brmckay)
Rust Cohle – “Fail. Actually, Stephen Cave is an active advocate of Terror Management Theory.”
Steve Cave From his TED Talk transcript – “Now, the theory behind this bias in the over 400 studies is called terror management theory, and the idea is simple. It’s just this. We develop our worldviews, that is, the stories we tell ourselves about the world and our place in it, in order to help us manage the terror of death.”
Not sure what you are replying to. It would be good to know what I failed at and why.
Rust Cohle – “I’m not sure what you’re replying to, either. You’re obviously confused about Stephen Cave’s intentions if you’re attempting to refute Terror Management Theory.”
Not refuting anything. Just pointing out that he has offered a 5th bias, and has forgotten to include it in his list.
Listen again to the end of the video.
Rust Cohle – “He didn’t ‘forget’ anything; why do you insist on using disparaging language, when in (sic) only demonstrates how little you understand of his views on Terror Management Theory?
The reason his ‘5th alternative’ is not included with the other four is that it is not an immortality story, but an acceptance of man’s mortality, i.e., ‘dead is dead.’ The other 4 stories humans tell themselves attempt to deny mortality in some way.
I’m well familiar with Cave’s talks. He also mentions the Epicurean alternative (i.e., ‘a 5th bias’) to the 4 common stories about dealing with death in another, more extensive, talk, below. Maybe you should give it a listen.
Stephen Cave – Immortality (2014) | IdeaFestival TV
Since he has included modern “Elixir of Immortality” efforts through science, I infer that he is indeed addressing efforts to sublimate our apparently overriding “Terror of Death”.
As indicated by the title “Terror Management Theory”.
The rationalization that “Death is not part of Life” would fall under that umbrella.
Cave, and probably you, are biased against the “immortality” scenarios and this leaves you unable to see that your own solution is no different.
Like many parables about counting the number in ones company, he forgets to count himself.
Not sure why my pointing that out sounds hostile to you.
Rust Cohle – “//your own solution is no different//
If you can’t see a significant difference between (a) a belief or attempt at immortality and (b) accepting mortality as natural, I’m not sure I can help you.
//Not sure why my pointing that out sounds hostile to you.//
Not sure why you’re perceiving hostility. Are you psychologically projecting?”
It would be wise not to blame me for the communication problem here. I merely wondered why my pointing out a plain-as-day bias, seemed hostile to YOU. (having perceived a defensiveness in the following statement)
“He didn’t “forget” anything; why do you insist on using disparaging language, …”
All that aside, though…
It is not reasonable to assume that death is not part of life, or that the FULL scope of what is “natural” does not allow for immortality. There are unwarranted assumptions being left unaddressed.
Isn’t that what he was talking about? Well, almost but not quite.
Rust Cohle – “If you have any evidence of immortality, be forthcoming with it, and don’t let it be //left unaddressed.// “
I’ll stick with my statement that it is “unreasonable to assume otherwise”.
(Consider the nature of time.)
You need to do some of the work. Can’t just be me and Steve Cave.
I’m done for now.
Rust Cohle – “You stick with your statement, I’ll stick with the hard science.”
[Note: Didn’t want to resume but I will point out that the science he has been citing is about “Terror of Death”, not immortality. Kevin Osborne picks it up from here.]