The Death Fear is lessoned by killing another

The Death Fear is lessoned by killing another

How can we, the “man on the street”, Tom & Jane, gain an insight into the meaning of this dread of death? A dread so strong that we kill to prevent that death and that we are so dedicated to repressing that dread that many things we do is done in that behalf.

I suspect most of us have experienced the feeling we call ‘claustrophobia’. I have experienced that feeling and I am confident that I would do almost anything to stop that experience. I suspect that it was the dread of death that caused the inmates of the Nazi concentration camps to tolerate such terror as daily existence must have been.

I suspect that dread of death is the reason that ‘water-boarding’ is such a popular form of torture. Torture is, I suspect, an effort to induce that same dread that we experience in a claustrophobic episode. I think that we might properly use the metaphor ‘dread of death is claustrophobia’ or perhaps ‘dread of death is water-boarding’.

The ‘curse’ is anything that lies about the creatureliness of wo/man. Any effort to make a lofty spiritual character out of sapiens represents an ‘occultism’, i.e. an ‘occult’ is anything that attempts to make supernatural the creatureliness of humans, which is the constant preoccupation of human society.

Jung and Adler recognized from the beginning that Freud was wrong in his dogmatic insistence regarding wo/man’s innate instincts of sexuality and aggression; however, they also recognized that Freud had correctly diagnosed and emphasized wo/man’s creatureliness.

Freud “reflected the true intuitions of genius, even though the particular intellectual counter-part of that emotion—the sexual theory—proved to be wrong. Man’s body was a “curse of fate”, and culture was built upon repression—not because man was a seeker only of sexuality, of pleasure, of life and expansiveness, as Freud thought, but because man was also primarily an avoider of death.”

Not sexuality, as Freud theorized, but the consciousness of death is the primary repression. Freud recognized the curse early and dedicated his life toward exposing it. However, he missed the correct scientific fact that was the source of the curse; this being the repression upon which society is constructed.

Becker theorizes that Freud’s mistake is reveled in one key idea, which emerged in his later writings. “Death instinct” was introduced by Freud in “Beyond the Pleasure Principle”. This theory was an attempt to patch up his libido theory, which he was very reluctant to reject. The death instinct was “a built in urge toward death as well as toward life”. He theorized that the death instinct was an instinctive urge to die, which was redirected outward into the desire to kill. Wo/man defeats this instinct by killing others.

Psychology has rejected Freud’s death instinct theory for a simpler one. Killing represents a symbolic solution that results from a fusion of animal anxiety with the death fear of the human animal. Rank says “the death fear of the ego is lessoned by the killing, the sacrifice, of the other; through the death of the other, one buys oneself free from the penalty of dying, of being killed.”

Churchill said something to the effect that “there is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at and missed”.

Quotes from “The Denial of Death”; Pulitzer Prize winner for nonfiction by Ernest Becker.

WOW COBERST!!!

Man, that is some deep deep stuff. Maybe you could lean forwards a little bit further so we can really see how deep it goes?

The old fart is on a campaign...or should I say a mindless rampage?...to illuminate the internet world with his quotations of bought wisdom and his belief that repeating ideas means you, both understand them and that you are thinking when you swallow them to spit them out.

Where, the fuck, does he get the time?
But how much time would copying and pasting take?
Logging in can me time consuming but it can be automated.

So, there he is, surfing, copying, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting, pasting....short break to empty the bladder and have some juice....pasting and pasting and pasting....and plastering, and pasting, and vomiting, and pasting, and farting, and pasting, and pissing, and pasting and shitting, and pasting...short break to jack-off with some young internet pron...and pasting, and pasting...and drooling, and pasting, and slowly drifting off to sleep over the keyboard, and pasting and pasti....


Rise and shine...a new day....more surfing..., some coffee as he copies, and then back to pasting and pasting, and pasting...

Hey, it's a life!

Satyr wrote:

coberst is a propagandist. If you don't care for the message of philosophy, at least look at the medium: how he presents his report. He is a troll if you only see the form of what he is doing. Maybe you are beyond the content, but some aren't. He is trying to free himself, from a world with no respect for philosophers.

PS, Denial of Death is one of the really excellent books for awakening. If you havn't read it, I suggest it.

with Satyr, things are pretty easy:

i'm right, you're wrong

that's all.

Drone wrote:

with Satyr, things are pretty easy:

i'm right, you're wrong

that's all.

Who gives a fuck about Satyr. He's getting his free speech. And you, what have you got to say for yourself?

Myself, I believe that the message is important, more so than the medium (excepting were they converge at infinity).

The medium of a radical message will always seem to be a sort of trolling, it has too, to carry the message which was un-say-able before the new medium emurged. Othertimes, as with philosophy, the message is perennial, and shown in doing.

What, if any, is your message?

Are you an Anna Frank with an important story to tell, but no real skill to tell it? Fine. Or are you a technician, at worst you can teach us something about presentation, fallacy, propaganda....

I can think of a few things you might have some expertise in.

must I have a 'message' in order to post here?

must I be an 'expert' on something to be allowed the right to speak?

i'm just trying to have a good time here. maybe i'll contribute something, maybe not

why are you interested in what i have to say anyway?

Drone wrote:

i'm just trying to have a good time here.

Then you are not here for Philosophy; you must be here for your own entertainment and personal amusement...

That is fine, but do not cry after this board eats you alive for being a mindless-Drone.

Drone wrote:

must I have a 'message' in order to post here?

must I be an 'expert' on something to be allowed the right to speak?

Then what do you want 'free speech' for?

Serge wrote:

Then what do you want 'free speech' for?

free speech must be given to everyone who wants to exchange ideas, whatever they are

but people who want to exchange ideas don't necessarily have a 'message', or are experts on anything

what's your message? Are you an expert on what?

i understand if you don't answer.

Drone wrote:

Serge wrote:

Then what do you want 'free speech' for?

what's your message? Are you an expert on what?

i understand if you don't answer.

This is vanity. I'm not going to try to justify my own specialness against the fear of death; after all, here I am -- for a moment.

Ego games can destroy people, upset their world and give them a glimpse at reality. Othertimes they reinforce unhealthy neuroses.

in other words, you are not going to justifiy your presence here

welcome to the club

Drone wrote:

in other words, you are not going to justifiy your presence here

welcome to the club

Please have a scan through my main posts, I don't want to play vanity with you, I am a humble philosopher of no accomplishment.