Illusions of Death

Published by


It is a philosophical problem that the reason for living only causes a reason to die. But it is also a philosophical solution to keep us from it. There are first questions for us to dissolve before one can begin to truly understand the importance of the matter of death as a profound argument. 

If I were to be asked whether this is the fundamental question and more urgent to humanity than the question of the golden standard or modern sciences, I would state that never have I inclined this to be a fundamental question but rather consisting partly of supporting the existentialist problems.

The facts of existentialism call quietly for careful study of five major pillars consisting of Death, Isolation, Identity, Freedom, and Meaning. And these are named in no particular order deriving itself to importance or fundamentally. 

In a man’s attachment to the world around him, he deludes himself with the notion of a life following after death. But what does this mean? It would be impossible, or at any length very difficult, to highlight all of the philosophical principles that cause life or the illusions of life, but it is comprised of what is around us. Our memories that precede us and our minds that become us: this is life.

Consequently, I recognise the nature of this statement will only cause more questions on life, but that is also nearly impossible to criticise and analyse all the directions which the question may face. So despite that, and at the end of everything, is the matter of death.

It is seen as taboo in the mind of the common man to begin to raise this question and that is our downfall. 

Death means death, which is the opposite of life. If there is to be a life following a death, then there is to not be a death. One action cannot precede the other, or for that matter, carry alongside it.

An understanding of the last paragraph gives a literal meaning to a life after death. I want to focus on a philosophical aspect as certainty is not on the side of the philosophers but rather faith in what he writes and a careful treading of the uncertain.

Faith, in a term, is also the partner to the philosophical solution. There are certain facts that I cannot insinuate belief upon: the trees produce oxygen, the sky is a thick grey in England, and I am a human. But faith, whether that be religious faith or philosophical faith, is comprised of that which we cannot understand and so try to organise to the best of our ability. 

A particular faith is neither inherently right nor wrong and can only be disproven once the correct actions have been undertaken. To find out the faith idea of a life after death one must first remove oneself from mortality: although this is ill-advised as a wise action. 

Why we create these faiths in the unknown can be either for organisation or denial. This is our downfall also: ignorance. 

The first is organisation. Things that we need help understanding we organise. Subconsciously we do this with everything and so we try to find meaning and sequence in unknown subjects such as the mind or what may follow after death. Though most can be organised, much cannot and so we find ourselves in a delusional state. 

A man will further commit himself to denial when he cannot find order in his life. This can figment itself in looking for a higher power to find purpose. As long as he is not doing anything to harm his fellow man it should be agreed that this is alright, but whether it is or is not it is still a denial of fact of the unknown. 

We create illusions and beliefs when we do not know and for a sense of peace of mind. But the taboos of talking about such acts should not be wavered for a comforting ignorance. This is why we must take our facts and faiths with equal sceptical minds. Understanding what death is is not our concern as humans, but what is making our mortality worth abiding by for what little we may have.