Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How doctors choose to die (2012)

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#61

Post by arfliw »

ColinWright wrote: post #60
arfliw wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that certainly is an intimidating set of links you have there, only two of those have any discussion -- one over two years ago, the other nearly four years ago.

Indeed - has anything changed? If not, then those discussions are still relevant, and there would be value in skimming them rather than simply repeating all the points again. If so, then it would be of value to see what has changed, possibly by reading the previous discussions. Perhaps the mood of the audience has changed, perhaps the general opinions of the HN community have shifted. Either way, being aware of the p…

The two with discussion are certainly relevant. The others were not. To me, they served only to give the false impression that this has been discussed a lot more than it actually has.

> They are not intended to scold people for submitting things that have been submitted before

So I guess that explains why you began with 'oh no, not again'

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#62

Post by Luc »

the_gipsy wrote: post #58
Ntrails wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why in gods name would I be frightened of oblivion? Dying is terrifying, because it comes with implications of suffering. No longer existing is simply enthralling. I will simply be gone. A just reward for making it through a lifetime imo.

I can't tell you why the thought of ceasing to exist would be frightening. It simply is to me, and I believe to most people. And most people, including me, ignore it and focus on the joys of life. There are of course different degrees of this displacement, some people may still acknowledge the idea but others might completely convince themselves that there is nothing to be scared of - or maybe there really is a way t…

It's perfect, since nobody can ever prove they're not fooling themselves. Perhaps I'll keep fooling myself until I die and die a fool.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#63

Post by mattlutze »

I had a conversation about this with a friend yesterday.

What I would like to understand, is what the difference is between one incurable terminal condition and the next is, and why we're culturally stuck on trying to divide things up into "approved" and "not-approved" categories.

Death happens for everyone. Most everyone, if they make it to very old age, will have degenerated physically and mentally from where they once were. I wonder, if our sympathies are telling us to consider whether a person with X condition should be allowed to end their life, whether that same thought process shouldn't consider all end-of-life conditions to be equal, given their shared terminality and expectation of degeneration.

Or, on the flip side, should we think terminality and expectation of degeneration in these cases is not enough, whether it is appropriate to accept it in this subset of cases.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#64

Post by kjhughes »

ColinWright wrote: post #60
arfliw wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that certainly is an intimidating set of links you have there, only two of those have any discussion -- one over two years ago, the other nearly four years ago.

Indeed - has anything changed? If not, then those discussions are still relevant, and there would be value in skimming them rather than simply repeating all the points again. If so, then it would be of value to see what has changed, possibly by reading the previous discussions. Perhaps the mood of the audience has changed, perhaps the general opinions of the HN community have shifted. Either way, being aware of the p…

   Most people are prisoners, thinking only about the future or living in the past.
   They are not in the present, and the present is where everything begins.

    -- Carlos Santana
That said tongue-in-cheek, the links do add value here; thanks for posting.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#65

Post by ColinWright »

arfliw wrote: post #61
ColinWright wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed - has anything changed? If not, then those discussions are still relevant, and there would be value in skimming them rather than simply repeating all the points again. If so, then it would be of value to see what has changed, possibly by reading the previous discussions. Perhaps the mood of the audience has changed, perhaps the general opinions of the HN community have shifted. Either way, being aware of the p…

The two with discussion are certainly relevant. The others were not. To me, they served only to give the false impression that this has been discussed a lot more than it actually has. > They are not intended to scold people for submitting things that have been submitted before So I guess that explains why you began with 'oh no, not again'

    > The two with discussion are certainly relevant.
    > The others were not. To me, they served only to
    > give the false impression that this has been
    > discussed a lot more than it actually has.
That's why I said how many comment there were - to give the data that there were lots of submissions, not all of which had generated discussions.

    > So I guess that explains why you
    > began with 'oh no, not again'
Yeah, OK, point taken. I guess I've just been around too long and read too much stuff. I went away for a while and have only just started to read again, but I guess I'm still too jaundiced.

I'll go away again. Sorry.

Do you want me to delete the comment? I think there's still time.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#66

Post by [deleted] »

arfliw wrote: post #61
ColinWright wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed - has anything changed? If not, then those discussions are still relevant, and there would be value in skimming them rather than simply repeating all the points again. If so, then it would be of value to see what has changed, possibly by reading the previous discussions. Perhaps the mood of the audience has changed, perhaps the general opinions of the HN community have shifted. Either way, being aware of the p…

The two with discussion are certainly relevant. The others were not. To me, they served only to give the false impression that this has been discussed a lot more than it actually has. > They are not intended to scold people for submitting things that have been submitted before So I guess that explains why you began with 'oh no, not again'

[deleted]

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#67

Post by Ntrails »

the_gipsy wrote: post #58
Ntrails wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why in gods name would I be frightened of oblivion? Dying is terrifying, because it comes with implications of suffering. No longer existing is simply enthralling. I will simply be gone. A just reward for making it through a lifetime imo.

I can't tell you why the thought of ceasing to exist would be frightening. It simply is to me, and I believe to most people. And most people, including me, ignore it and focus on the joys of life. There are of course different degrees of this displacement, some people may still acknowledge the idea but others might completely convince themselves that there is nothing to be scared of - or maybe there really is a way t…

Life is not [just/only] full of joys, but of obligations, troubles, and pain. Those who enjoy life are doubtless scared of losing it - it's foolish to assume that everyone does though. Nor can such a position be swept away as illness or irrationality. It is neither.

If someone gave me a way out right now that caused nobody for whom I care any pain, I'd take it. If I am honest I reckon I'd probably wonder about "what's next" for a good few minutes before saying yes...

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#68

Post by sireat »

visarga wrote: post #40
baddox wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 13.5 billion years of darkness before I was born is frightening as well, but it's done and over with, plus it's way shorter than the upcoming darkness.

The universe itself is the life you have, it doesn't die, just makes more conscious entities. Life itself will not die with me, but go on forever. We just need to think large when contemplating death.

What is your reasoning behind thinking that life will go on forever?

Life - conscious life with qualia.

Even for allowing for unobservable universe that is not given either.

There is no guarantee that there will be more conscious entities say 200 years from now.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#69

Post by sago »

the_gipsy wrote: post #53
sago wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't frighten me. It won't go dark forever. Just as there was no 13.5bn years of darkness before I was born. There will be no qualia of time. I think attitudes are changing. The campaign to be able to determine how and when we die is shaping up to be a significant battle for a fundamental civil right. I think we'll win it. Whether it is soon enough for my wife to avoid threat of prosecution if she is with me wh…

> It doesn't frighten me. I don't think that's entirely true - it's just that all functioning members of society displace or ignore their fear of death with some method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_anxiety_%28psychology%29

Leaving aside the implication that I'm either in denial, or not a functioning member of society... And leaving aside that the link doesn't quite say either, from what I can see...

I agree that having no fear of oblivion is unusual.

It's hard to distinguish fear of death from fear of dying. I fear the latter.

It's hard to separate fear of death from cultural expectations of death. My reading is that most people fear oblivion partly because they haven't thought about it much, because they are focussed on worry about being wrong about their chosen afterlife scenario.

More anecdotes, but I've noticed that small children, while being afraid of a lot of things, don't seem to suffer existential death anxiety. I believe, as was pointed out in your link, that such anxiety is largely (but maybe not entirely) socially constructed through language.

And if something is socially constructed, it can be changed. With difficulty, but it is possible.

Re: How doctors choose to die (2012)

#70

Post by dhimes »

themartorana wrote: post #29
sago wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is getting OT, so apologies. And thank you for the second paragraph. But I'm interested in the first. To me it doesn't seem like I will cease to be, in any meaningful way. To cease to have something is to have it at some point but not another. I will never experience not being. So I find it hard to worry about that. Of course I enjoy being, but it's not like I would rather be than not be, because the latt…

I never said it was a rational feeling :) I don't know the right way to explain the feeling. I think it's mostly the same sadness that one experiences when anything particularly wonderful comes to an end. I have known loss in a variety of ways, and I imagine dying taps in to that same idea of mourning. Something that I enjoy terribly must end, I have to say goodbye to not only a terrific experience - but to experienc…

"You" die every moment, and in the next moment a new "you" arises. The "you" now is different than the "you" five minutes ago- cells have been born and died, you've exchanged particles with your surroundings, your thoughts have changed, and so on. There is no "you" in the sense of an unchanging "being." It's impossible for "you" to exist for more than a moment.

On the other hand the "you"s that have arisen have left an indelible footprint of their existence on the universe. It's impossible for those footprints to go away. They are immortal.

That is not to say it is irrational to grieve your (our) unavoidable lack of being "alive," but it helps to understand clearly what we are grieving. It's not the ceasing of the existence of "you"- that happens every moment. It is the lack of the next arising.

These are largely Buddhist thoughts FWIW.

Post reply on HN