| Re: Is death a good or bad thing?
I consider only natural death because the alternative is almost entirely of our own creation, save natural disasters. Man killing man is un-natural in many senses. But again, I think that we die when we are supposed to. For instance, if Socrates had lived on, what more could he have acheived? We will never know and I think we are better for it. Though he died from the hands of man, he also arrived at the conclusion that it was his time. No one person can be responsible for propelling our species forward because it would breed in weakness. We all need to think and we all need to act collectively in order to truly acheive progression. Otherwise, we are left with nothing more than the prospect of progression without the know how to back it up. This is where we are at today in the sense that our technology is more advanced than we are in many instances. We cannot emotionally handle the technology collectively.
As far as all good actions reaping good results, no. Neither with all bad actions reaping bad results. Again, there is no good and bad. Only left and right. Hitler taught us a lot and so, eventually, can be considered good where as the inventions of atomic energy for the purpose of natural resource conservation created the most destructive weapon known to mankind. A bad thing. Good and bad are illusions in the mind and no result will ever directly match the intended result because we will find other ways to use it.
We may not always be willing to admit that we have reached our capacity for knowledge and understanding but too many lines begin to blur when we acheive too much and we begin to decline. We must stay resolute but most not ever know all that there is to know or acheive all that there is to acheive. We are all in this together and must continue that way through life and through death.
__________________
Stop over-complicating things. The universe is a ball of string and we are only going to unravel it one knot at a time
|