John Wise (H01) - Final Report Blogpost

  Saving Humanity With Death

    I Chose to do my report on Part XI of Question Everything. This part of the book is titled “Is This the End of the World as We Know it?” and is about how the world may be ending in our current time. I chose three of the essays from the chapter to cover, and connect to each other. If the world is ending it is pretty evident as to why- humans are causing it. If we want to save our species and continue the traditions and values of our society we need to make changes in what we are doing. The best way that we can draw attention to this is through our fear of death, and use this fear to save all that we have created. 

When going over this subject the essay by Simon Critchley in this chapter of Question Everything, titled To Philosophize is to Learn to Die. This essay was written during the early stages of the Covid-19 Pandemic, being published on April 11, 2020. Critchley’s essay explores the fact that death is inevitable, and that to live a good life we need to accept this fact, and to not let it bother us. Critchley explains this through a quote from Montaigne, who once said “He who has learned how to die has unlearned how to be a slave.” in this Montaigne is that we are all pulled down by death, and that it plagues us as humans, and to overcome or be ridden of this plague, we must come to terms with this and embrace death. In this sense death is a disease or a nuisance, but we can never get rid of it so we must learn how to coexist with it, we need to not let it take grip of our entire life because if we do we really have not lived a fulfilling life, in a philosophical sense. Another reference Critchley makes in the essay is to T.S. Elliot’s thought of John Webster, which he said that “we have to see the skull beneath the skin.”  (Critchley Par. 8) This is a wonderful description of how death is in us all, as the representation of death most often is a skull and the fact that there is one in all of us is a testament to how we will all eventually pass away. Critchley then goes on to explain that to understand how to not let death take hold of our lives, it becomes easier after we make the distinction between fear and anxiety. He describes fear as that of actual threats in the world, he uses an example of a bear coming into his home, of course he is going to have fear of the bear but once it is gone that fear will recede and go away. In contrast, he describes the anxiety as being that of things that we can not see or things that go undetected by us, like a virus. In this instance death would be an anxiety, we can not see or sense death. Critchley then goes on to talk about how we need to make the anxiety a vessel of freedom, and that we need to face this anxiety and not hide from it. I think that this is a good way, though not easy, to come to terms with death, we need to use this anxiety in a good way. Critchley refers to Pascal for this view, Pascal is quoted in the essay as saying “Let us strive to think well. That is the principle of mortality.” (Critchley Par. 16) This is saying that knowing of our mortality and that we are fragile, in the sense that we can die, is what helps us to think well, and make better decisions for our survival. I find that this is true, and by harnessing the anxiety we feel towards death, we can avoid situations that will ultimately cause it. 

Now that we know about how having an anxiety of death helps us to make decisions in dire times of survival it is time to move to the essay by Alison McQueen How to be a Prophet of Doom. This essay was written in light of Trump's policies and dismissal of nuclear power throughout the globe. In the essay McQueen is trying to bring attention to the threat that this was to the world, and how nuclear arms could mean the end of humanity. The essay calls back to Hans J. Morgenthau's essay Death in the Nuclear Age and how prior to it being written people were dismissive of nuclear threats, and the culture of Nuclear denial was very prominent. Morgenthau wrote the essay as a way to spread the existential fear of nuclear destruction. McQueen brings up the fact that in the early 60s Herman Kahn was arguing that the United States could survive an all out nuclear war and even resume a somewhat normal living in the aftermath. To me this is a scary thought, as many people know today that nuclear threats are not something to be dismissed. The essay by Morgenthau calls to the most basic of human fears, the fear of death. The essay is very literal, and does not spare the fact that nuclear destruction is destruction of everything, Morgenthau writes “Nuclear destruction is mass destruction, both of persons and of things. It signifies the simultaneous destruction of tens of millions of people, of whole families, generations, and societies, of all things that they have inherited and created.” (Morgenthau Par. 12) McQueen calls back to this passage, calling it the most remarkable passage of the essay. She then goes on to explain that it is easy to dismiss Morgenthau's warnings as we avoided a nuclear war, and in this his prophecy or writings were wrong. This is a good thing however, as he was a “Prophet of doom” but this is to call attention to the unthinkable, and to use the anxiety we get when facing a most certain doom in order to avoid a species wide death. Using the anxiety of death to help to save the entirety of humanity is so effective as most people know they will eventually die but they do not want to hasten it to a time before they think it is reasonable. 

Image of Hiroshima after Aug 6, 1946

Since nuclear destruction could potentially wipe out the entirety of humanity, it begs the question that is the title of Todd May’s essay, Would Human Extinction Be a tragedy? May says in the essay that it would not be, yet at the same time it would be. For the argument that it would not be, May brings up the fact that humans are destroying large parts of the world due to three main reasons: climate change, increasing population, and factory farming. If this were all there was to the discussion then it would be true that the end of humanity would be no tragedy. Yet this is not the end of the story, May argues that with the end of humanity we would lose all of our progress, all of our art, literature and culture. The counter argument to this is that with no one left to experience these things then there is no one to say whether it would be a tragedy, as there is just that, no one left. May counters this by bringing up that we can only look at human extinction through the looking glass of humanity. In looking at the facts we can see that there is no clear answer as to whether it would be a tragedy or not. In the end May says that it may be a tragedy, yet the world would be better off without us. I think this is true, we cause so much harm and without humans the world would be a better place environmentally. Yet it would be duller with no one to make art, or see the goddess in their hobbies, but this is only from a human perspective. To conclude the essay May says that despite all of this the most chilling thing is that whether it be a tragedy or not we may just bring about our own demise. I see it as a tragedy to lose all that we have, and I think this would especially be true if it comes about by a nuclear war, or just nuclear destruction in general, as there may not be anything left to appreciate about the world we live in. 

In conclusion we all have an anxiety towards death, and it is what helps us to avoid disasters, and that helps us to carry on as a species. If we want this to continue then we need to realize the threats that we are to ourselves and fix what we have done before it is truly too late and there is nothing left of us. The essays of Simon Critchley, Alison McQueen and Todd May work together to convey this message. I recommend reading their essays if you have any doubt about this, or have any further questions. It is dire that we change what we are doing to ensure the survival of humanity. 

Discussion Questions:

Do you think that human extinction would or would not be a tragedy or both? 

Do you think that there is a difference between anxiety and the fear of death?

Do you think that having an anxiety of death can help make us stronger, or do you think it makes us weaker as a species?