TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,363
While growing up I used to hear about how people talk about breaking records in longevity of life, living to 100 (centennials), and so forth. It almost seemed like some good thing about quantity, perhaps either for their own personal reasons, breaking records, or setting new ones, and what not. As I was growing up, and being programmed and inundated with society's narrative about the longevity of life, I was blinded by such narrative about the quantity of life and how short lives are often negative outcomes. That prolongation of life and it didn't help that society and people around me (my peers, my family, and many more) often promote the longevity of life and I hear many people talk about how they wish to live until old age and experience all the (normie) things that they deem valuable, which is great for them and as per the mainstream perspective.
Disclaimer: Keep in mind that as a young person at the time, ignorant of other perspectives, I had nothing else to work with and would only see the truth as I've grown older, when I reached adulthood, and later started to question, ponder about the meaning of sentience itself.
After I've adopted and arrived at pro-choice philosophy and perspective, I realize the futility of life or sentience itself, I see the prolongation of sentience to be a negative, with mostly cons than pros. It is essentially like a flip in perspective, an inverse of what sentience really meant. Then after that, I started to see that the cessation of sentience while making the most while one is present and also dying young is not necessarily a negative thing, contrary to what mainstream society and what most people seem to think..
Examples and scenarios:
For example, in the past when I used to think about short lives would be tragic such as "they/he/she/it died young!", "too soon…" or anything along those lines and used to think that living a full life is perhaps a good life, but upon learning about shorter sentience and quality in the limited duration, longevity and quantity itself isn't necessarily a positive thing, especially when one is afflicted with mundanity, the gamble of uncertainty of sentience at every waking moment (every human being alive is only one [major] accident away from death or immense suffering, a fate worse than death itself). People used to be really antagonistic and very opposed to even the mention or hint of 'death' in any context, even going to great lengths to suppress, censor, or even avoid it, but when I started to look more in depth, I start to see that sometimes death can be a relief, a relief from immense suffering that the vast majority of human beings regardless of age will endure, barring those who took their own lives on their own terms, especially when younger. Of course, this doesn't imply that I am pro-mortalist, far from it. I support those who choose to exit on their own terms, and admire those who do so to avoid unnecessary and unwanted suffering at the hands of sentience and continued gambling for potential for worse outcomes.
Another example is when growing up, I was often bombarded by anti-CTB campaigns and people denouncing the idea of CTB and looking down on it, as if it is some illness or pathology (I won't get into all the details as that is addressed in another thread or will be for another topic itself) rather than an act of liberation from the shackles of sentience and being made to endure whatever sentience (good and bad) have in store for them. While the situations that lead up to CTB can certainly be tragic, because as humanity as a whole cannot relieve every grievance or cause for suffering, the next best thing is for one to decide when one has enough of suffering and then exercise their decision to exit on their own terms.
In general, the gist is that I don't see living to old age to necessarily be something that is a 'good thing' (of course, good and bad are subjective terms and means different things in different perspectives and contexts). While that is what society sees as good and using the US life expectancy for it's citizens, I will assume 80 years of age, and for those who lived up to those years, they will eventually have almost 80 years of suffering, mundanity, and what not, but those who chose to go on their own terms, they get to pick and choose how much they willing to endure and go with less suffering than allowing nature or other factors outside of their control to take hold of their fate. One such example is a person named Martin Manley, who was overall relatively healthy and lead a fairly successful life (of course, we don't know every detail of his life except he himself!), and decided to CTB at the exact age of 60. He lived and died on his own terms, planned out his CTB then and there. While he may not be the only person to have done so (as there are likely others in this world who have done the same, just not publicized), he at least avoided infirmity and allowing nature or others' to dictate his fate. As for age and number, of course, it may be subjective, as Manley chose 60 for his own subjective, personal reasons. For others, it could be any number of those.
I mainly wrote this article to express my stance on sentience, give a story of how my view of sentience itself changed, and also show how the shift in viewing sentience changed once one's relationship with sentience and philosophy regarding death has changed. Suddenly, everything that was once established by mainstream society is suddenly flipped on it's head and different! That isn't necessarily a bad thing, and of course, while from our perspective, being that of the pro-choice point of view, we value about taking charge of our own lives including whether to continue or end it, whereas the mainstream, pro-life and anti-death stance only seeks to prolong life at all costs, regardless of the quality of life itself. Does anyone have similar perceptions about life itself and the duration as well as quantity of sentience, especially after discovering the pro-choice philosophy and adopting similar tenets?
Disclaimer: Keep in mind that as a young person at the time, ignorant of other perspectives, I had nothing else to work with and would only see the truth as I've grown older, when I reached adulthood, and later started to question, ponder about the meaning of sentience itself.
After I've adopted and arrived at pro-choice philosophy and perspective, I realize the futility of life or sentience itself, I see the prolongation of sentience to be a negative, with mostly cons than pros. It is essentially like a flip in perspective, an inverse of what sentience really meant. Then after that, I started to see that the cessation of sentience while making the most while one is present and also dying young is not necessarily a negative thing, contrary to what mainstream society and what most people seem to think..
Examples and scenarios:
For example, in the past when I used to think about short lives would be tragic such as "they/he/she/it died young!", "too soon…" or anything along those lines and used to think that living a full life is perhaps a good life, but upon learning about shorter sentience and quality in the limited duration, longevity and quantity itself isn't necessarily a positive thing, especially when one is afflicted with mundanity, the gamble of uncertainty of sentience at every waking moment (every human being alive is only one [major] accident away from death or immense suffering, a fate worse than death itself). People used to be really antagonistic and very opposed to even the mention or hint of 'death' in any context, even going to great lengths to suppress, censor, or even avoid it, but when I started to look more in depth, I start to see that sometimes death can be a relief, a relief from immense suffering that the vast majority of human beings regardless of age will endure, barring those who took their own lives on their own terms, especially when younger. Of course, this doesn't imply that I am pro-mortalist, far from it. I support those who choose to exit on their own terms, and admire those who do so to avoid unnecessary and unwanted suffering at the hands of sentience and continued gambling for potential for worse outcomes.
Another example is when growing up, I was often bombarded by anti-CTB campaigns and people denouncing the idea of CTB and looking down on it, as if it is some illness or pathology (I won't get into all the details as that is addressed in another thread or will be for another topic itself) rather than an act of liberation from the shackles of sentience and being made to endure whatever sentience (good and bad) have in store for them. While the situations that lead up to CTB can certainly be tragic, because as humanity as a whole cannot relieve every grievance or cause for suffering, the next best thing is for one to decide when one has enough of suffering and then exercise their decision to exit on their own terms.
In general, the gist is that I don't see living to old age to necessarily be something that is a 'good thing' (of course, good and bad are subjective terms and means different things in different perspectives and contexts). While that is what society sees as good and using the US life expectancy for it's citizens, I will assume 80 years of age, and for those who lived up to those years, they will eventually have almost 80 years of suffering, mundanity, and what not, but those who chose to go on their own terms, they get to pick and choose how much they willing to endure and go with less suffering than allowing nature or other factors outside of their control to take hold of their fate. One such example is a person named Martin Manley, who was overall relatively healthy and lead a fairly successful life (of course, we don't know every detail of his life except he himself!), and decided to CTB at the exact age of 60. He lived and died on his own terms, planned out his CTB then and there. While he may not be the only person to have done so (as there are likely others in this world who have done the same, just not publicized), he at least avoided infirmity and allowing nature or others' to dictate his fate. As for age and number, of course, it may be subjective, as Manley chose 60 for his own subjective, personal reasons. For others, it could be any number of those.
I mainly wrote this article to express my stance on sentience, give a story of how my view of sentience itself changed, and also show how the shift in viewing sentience changed once one's relationship with sentience and philosophy regarding death has changed. Suddenly, everything that was once established by mainstream society is suddenly flipped on it's head and different! That isn't necessarily a bad thing, and of course, while from our perspective, being that of the pro-choice point of view, we value about taking charge of our own lives including whether to continue or end it, whereas the mainstream, pro-life and anti-death stance only seeks to prolong life at all costs, regardless of the quality of life itself. Does anyone have similar perceptions about life itself and the duration as well as quantity of sentience, especially after discovering the pro-choice philosophy and adopting similar tenets?
