Why can't humans face eternal oblivion without creating comforting fictions like heaven or reincarnation?
>>18175462>comforting fictions like reincarnationHaha. Yeah. Comforting...
>>18175462Since you don't have consciousness, you cannot experience non-existence, so maybe from the subjective perspective, your finite life just resets in eternal recurrence.
>>18175462Because most of them are violent apes with a reptilian brain.Even in the 21th century, most people cannot basic philosophy, or moral. (keep in mind than less than 1 billion people out 8 can be considered true first world-er) So you have to feed their minds more digestible ideas, like fairytales and religious parabole.
>>18175472But why are people afraid of it? You literally just cease to exist and there's no suffering anymore
>>18175484Has it occurred to you that there are millions of people with the belief that existence is fake and gay and that having to endure more of it after death is bad?
>>18175462t. hylic
>>18175462Reincarnation isn't comforting if you actually engage with the thought. Most people don't take it seriously and so they are spared the existential horror. Fear of death is less intense than fear of living forever. Furthermore, the issue is this: to assert nothing is to already give it the predication of being. If nothing is being, then we have to investigate being in itself. This would be being without any determination, without anything to intuit in it, just the bare knowing of being. This would be nothing. Given that we know being is nothing and nothing is being, we can know *change*. This eternal change is the principle that spawns all further determinate things, as the pattern applies to itself, generating novel phenomena.The knowing of this is the means by which one has reference of I and not-I, this allows for one to know oneself in reference to what is other (being for other), and to know the other in reference to oneself (being in itself), and then to know oneself with the other, mutually conditioning one another (being in and for itself). This allows one to properly isolate the I from conditions, and to know the unconditioned I in reference to given conditions. This unconditioned I is what is meant by the soul. It is the real you, and as you begin to know this, you learn aspects of yourself which are transcendental, not connected to this world, not derived from experiences that happened in this life. This knowledge itself must be experienced, though. You cannot know it abstractly just by reading a post like this, or a book. Though texts can assist in realizing what one is even looking for. Read the German Idealists, the Neo-Confucians, or the Vedantists if you want further guidance.
>>18175890Sounds like ontological cope because you're afraid that death is final.
>>18175462Oblivion is also another fiction.
>>18175462You are just coping with your own existential dread by acting superior. Maybe some of us just find the idea of matter and energy transforming forever based on natural laws to be based as fuck. You're the one who can't handle that death might just be a natural process and not some profound tragedy you're too smart to fall for.
>>18176200Retard. Finality isn't even final. In order for the concept of finitude to be, there must be a condition for it, something of which finitude is only part of a substrate. That is infinitude. The finite, by being an end, must have something which it is an end into. This is the un-ending. You don't read and you should be reading books more than posting on 4Chan.
>>18176204It's the most probable fiction according to neuroscience.
>>18176265I don't need to read Hegel to understand that what you're doing here is simply ontological gymnastics designed to make annihilation feel impossible. Probably because annihilation seems psychologically unbearable to you.
>>18175462Nonexistence is scary. Nobody wants that. Even those that say they want that don't want that.
