All fears are the fear of death, all others are derivatives

[MikeNovack]

Many things, whether in nature or the synthetic nature of societies, can be a threat to the existence of life forms.

Leaving aside our current large scale societies, for us humans to have a CULTURE is not "synthetic". Our culture is an abstract entity, running on "hardware"that is a group of humans. It is subject to evolutionary pressure (competition from other cultures). We have had culture longer than we have been humans.

Culture is NOT something uniquely human. Other social animals have culture.

[popeye1945]

Many things, whether in nature or the synthetic nature of societies, can be a threat to the existence of life forms.

Leaving aside our current large scale societies, for us humans to have a CULTURE is not "synthetic". Our culture is an abstract entity, running on "hardware"that is a group of humans. It is subject to evolutionary pressure (competition from other cultures). We have had culture longer than we have been humans.

Culture is NOT something uniquely human. Other social animals have culture.

Stop creating things to then protest. I never stated that culture was uniquely human. Societies/cultures are an insulation to the harsh unawareness of nature and are synthetic to the degree they are not in harmony with nature. We are getting off topic here. The topic is all fear is the fear of death no matter how remote the fear is thought to be. I think a hint might be that the chemistry is probably the same, but in various degrees of intensity.

[Belinda]

Many things, whether in nature or the synthetic nature of societies, can be a threat to the existence of life forms.

Leaving aside our current large scale societies, for us humans to have a CULTURE is not "synthetic". Our culture is an abstract entity, running on "hardware"that is a group of humans. It is subject to evolutionary pressure (competition from other cultures). We have had culture longer than we have been humans.

Culture is NOT something uniquely human. Other social animals have culture.

Some cultures of practise , such as wars of attrition, are in tension with the biological fear response. Sometimes the biological fear response is insufficient to save species . However insofar as natural selection depends partly on the fear response , it is a biological not a cultural response. Nevertheless humans do adapt culturally to environmental circumstances much more so than any other animal species.

If any culture of belief or practise should at some future time breed humans that lacked the fear response, that would be a human type which would become extinct unless artificially maintained.

[MikeNovack]

The topic is all fear is the fear of death no matter how remote the fear is thought to be. I think a hint might be that the chemistry is probably the same, but in various degrees of intensity.

FEAR (of whatever) is probably release of some chemical, the same chemical regardless of the source of the fear. Intensity then by how much (concentration). There are physical symptoms associated with fear.

[popeye1945]

The topic is all fear is the fear of death no matter how remote the fear is thought to be. I think a hint might be that the chemistry is probably the same, but in various degrees of intensity.

FEAR (of whatever) is probably release of some chemical, the same chemical regardless of the source of the fear. Intensity then by how much (concentration). There are physical symptoms associated with fear.

Fear's chemistry is the same across the board, lighting up the same areas of the brain. The fight, flight, or freeze response is the most recognized.

[Age]

We are getting off topic here. The topic is all fear is the fear of death no matter how remote the fear is thought to be.

The 'fear of death' only arises in older human beings, only.
However, other fears exist before 'the fear of death' ever arises.
So, all fear is not 'the fear of death' at all.

As shown and just proved True by the fact that 'fear' exists even before the 'fear of death' ever comes in to play.

I think a hint might be that the chemistry is probably the same, but in various degrees of intensity.

Even if 'the chemistry' is the exact same, and even at the exact same degrees of intensity, 'this' in no way at all shows nor proves that 'all fear' is what is called, 'the fear of death', at all.

Now, now that what I have said and presented, here, can not be refuted by absolutely any one, your claim that 'all fear is the fear of death, (no matter how remote the fear is thought to be'), has just be Falsified, and thus has been 'put to rest', as some would now say.

But, as always, if absolutely any one would like to have a Truly open and honest peaceful discussion to either prove otherwise, to just challenge, and/or to just obtain further clarification and elaboration, then by all means let 'us' begin.

[Veritas Aequitas]

All fears are the fear of death, and any derivative can be linked back to the primary fear of death. Your thoughts?

It goes further than that.

Empirically, it is evident there is a biological teleonomic drive to preserve the species.
To do do, all living species [so human species] are 'programmed' [DNA wise] with the following;
- the drive for reproduction of the next generation
- the fear of death, very strongly within reproductive age, tapering pass that,
this two primal drives are to facilitate the preservation of the species.

The above is such that each individual carry the responsibility to ensure the survival of the species which is very forceful, tsunamic so to say within the individual's psychic.

This fear of death is fundamental and it is one of the force that drives all human activities from the subliminal level.

With self-awareness and so awareness of inevitable mortality there is a potential paralysis of life from this very powerful tsunamic force -the primal fear of death. Fortunately, humans are adapted with inhibitors to modulate this forceful fear of death. That is why we don't hear of everyone fearing death all the time but only at times and when triggered by thoughts or sight of death.

As with human nature, there are degrees to the effectiveness of the inhibitors to suppress the fear of death. Those who have severe damage or weak inhibitors end up with thanatophobia a mental illness that need psychiatric help.

Point is, all philosophical views of members here are subjected to the fear of death; with theists highly influenced by it thus needing salvation to soothe the pains from the fear of death. Philosophical realists clinging to an absolutely mind-independent reality are also highly affected by the forces of these primal fear of death.
Wokeism is another lot who are highly affected by the fear of death to the extent some will kill those who do not agree with them [nb: Charlie Kirk].

Those in the know [many philosophical anti-realists] of the above facts strive to improve the efficacy of their inhibitors, so that they can be modulated to improve their well-being optimally.

The notion that there is some "programmed" drive to "facilitate the preservation of the species" is belied by history, biology and genetics. Are the Israelis driven to "preserve the species" when they slaughter Palestinians? How about the Germans in the Holocaust? How about male lions, who kill the lion cubs fathered by others when they take over a pride of lionesses?

IN fact, members of a species compete most directly with each other for scarce resources. They eat the same food, farm the same land, and mate with the same potential parents. Because they are so alike, they compete more directly with members of their species than with members of any other. Hence a long history of violence.

In addition, genetic "success" is sometimes facilitated by death -- if you can save three of your siblings by an altruistic act that kills you, you will facilitate your genetic "success" more effectively than saving yourself and allowing them to die.

Also, the notion that animals are "programmed" by their genes is problematic. Nature vs. nurture is inevitably an unresolvable issue -- both are doubtless involved in behavior.

Here are the basic points:

Teleonomic preservation of a species refers to the apparent purposefulness of structures and functions that an organism has evolved to ensure its survival and the continuation of its species. It is an outcome of natural processes, particularly natural selection, rather than a conscious, intentional goal.
This concept can be broken down into three key aspects:

Teleonomy vs. Teleology: The term teleonomy was coined to distinguish biological, goal-directed behavior from teleology, which implies a conscious, predetermined purpose or divine intention. For example, the teleonomic explanation for a bird's migration is that it is governed by an inherited genetic program, whereas a teleological explanation would suggest the bird consciously decides to migrate to a warmer climate.

Mechanisms of preservation: The "preservation of the species" is not a conscious objective pursued by the organism. Instead, it is the result of underlying genetic programs and evolutionary adaptations. Natural selection favors individuals with traits that increase their chances of survival and reproductive success. Over time, these advantageous traits become common in the population, giving the impression that the species is purposefully striving for survival.

Focus on adaptive traits: All traits that increase an organism's fitness—including complex behaviors, physiological functions, and physical structures—can be described as teleonomic because they contribute to the overarching "goal" of reproductive success. For example, an animal's ability to locate food, escape predators, or attract a mate are all teleonomic traits that promote its individual survival, and by extension, the survival of its species.

In summary, "teleonomic preservation of the species" is a way of describing the fundamental, non-conscious purpose that drives all life: to pass on genetic material to the next generation and ensure the long-term continuation of the lineage.

Empirical evidence check:
Is there any research to support the point that there are species that emerged with the direction to be extinct immediately?
No! so my point with species preservation is valid and sound.

"Empirically, it is evident there is a biological teleonomic drive to preserve the species.
To do do, all living species [so human species] are 'programmed' [DNA wise] with the following;
1. - the drive for reproduction of the next generation
2. - the fear of death, very strongly within reproductive age, tapering pass that,
this two primal drives are to facilitate the preservation of the species."

With 2, i.e. the fear of death, and to ensure being alive, all humans are 'programed' with the following drives:

i. the 4Fs - Fight, Flight, Food, F.ck [fornication or the sex drive].
ii. to ensure access to food, all humans are 'programmed' with the ability 'to kill' plus also for self-defense purposes.

As with human natures, outliers [mutations] from the majority are critical to facilitate survival of the species as well.
Being fallible and imperfect, some of these outliers [10% = 800+ million] has the wrong wirings and got perverted, psychopathy and the like.
As such, the extremes of killing in wars, genocide, homicides, and other forms of violence are a perversion of the norm.

But to ensure preservation of the species, nature operate and reduce risk with reliance on large numbers.

In addition, to counter the above all humans are also programmed with the moral potential [unfolding slowly at present]. Note this evolving trend:
The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined is a 2011 book by Steven Pinker, in which the author argues that violence in the world has declined both in the long run and in the short run and suggests explanations as to why this has occurred.[1] The book uses data documenting declining violence across time and geography. This paints a picture of massive declines in the violence of all forms, from war, to improved treatment of children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bette ... Our_Nature

It is evident despite WW I and II plus so many wars, plagues, pandemics, catastrophe since humans emerged, the human population has exploded thus securing the survival of the human species as programmed teleonomically.
There is a nuance point to the above [separate subject], but the main point here is, it counters your view that there is a contradiction to my thesis.

[LuckyR]

Help yourself. Where do they feature above?

Are you related to Age? Say what you have to say, one liner queries don't cut it.

I've couldn't say it any clearer mate, what fears of living? I can't help you if you won't help yourself. And you won't.

popeye and I were discussing that those who are suffering can see death as an end to that suffering, thus putting continued life as an obstacle to that release. Thus whereas many close and not so close to death may fear death, these suffering folks, instead of fearing death, fear the absence of death.

[Fairy]

Being aware of one’s consciousness is not for everyone, let’s just be honest about this.

Some just prefer to be dead, or to have never been born. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with any feeling because feeling is simply feeling being felt. No one can stop feeling or change a feeling, feeling is just what it is the instant feeling arises.

If you can be aware you are conscious then you can also be aware you are unconscious.

Sometimes you can want either,or, you can prefer to be conscious over unconscious, or, prefer to be unconscious over conscious.

Nothing makes any difference because nothing prevents either, or.

No one is living life, no one is being lived.

No one is dying, everyone is dying to live. Both life and death are the same thing, they just differ in appearance that’s all.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Bollocks.

[Belinda]

Are you related to Age? Say what you have to say, one liner queries don't cut it.

I've couldn't say it any clearer mate, what fears of living? I can't help you if you won't help yourself. And you won't.

popeye and I were discussing that those who are suffering can see death as an end to that suffering, thus putting continued life as an obstacle to that release. Thus whereas many close and not so close to death may fear death, these suffering folks, instead of fearing death, fear the absence of death.

What you are talking about, Lucky, is fear of the dying event not existential fear of ceasing to be.
Medically -assisted dying is legal in Oregon and I hope will soon become legal here in the UK. Moribund animals including of course humans often become quiescent about dying.

[Alexiev]

Here are the basic points:

Teleonomic preservation of a species refers to the apparent purposefulness of structures and functions that an organism has evolved to ensure its survival and the continuation of its species. It is an outcome of natural processes, particularly natural selection, rather than a conscious, intentional goal.
This concept can be broken down into three key aspects:

Teleonomy vs. Teleology: The term teleonomy was coined to distinguish biological, goal-directed behavior from teleology, which implies a conscious, predetermined purpose or divine intention. For example, the teleonomic explanation for a bird's migration is that it is governed by an inherited genetic program, whereas a teleological explanation would suggest the bird consciously decides to migrate to a warmer climate.

Mechanisms of preservation: The "preservation of the species" is not a conscious objective pursued by the organism. Instead, it is the result of underlying genetic programs and evolutionary adaptations. Natural selection favors individuals with traits that increase their chances of survival and reproductive success. Over time, these advantageous traits become common in the population, giving the impression that the species is purposefully striving for survival.

Focus on adaptive traits: All traits that increase an organism's fitness—including complex behaviors, physiological functions, and physical structures—can be described as teleonomic because they contribute to the overarching "goal" of reproductive success. For example, an animal's ability to locate food, escape predators, or attract a mate are all teleonomic traits that promote its individual survival, and by extension, the survival of its species.

In summary, "teleonomic preservation of the species" is a way of describing the fundamental, non-conscious purpose that drives all life: to pass on genetic material to the next generation and ensure the long-term continuation of the lineage.

Empirical evidence check:
Is there any research to support the point that there are species that emerged with the direction to be extinct immediately?
No! so my point with species preservation is valid and sound.

"Empirically, it is evident there is a biological teleonomic drive to preserve the species.
To do do, all living species [so human species] are 'programmed' [DNA wise] with the following;
1. - the drive for reproduction of the next generation
2. - the fear of death, very strongly within reproductive age, tapering pass that,
this two primal drives are to facilitate the preservation of the species."

With 2, i.e. the fear of death, and to ensure being alive, all humans are 'programed' with the following drives:

i. the 4Fs - Fight, Flight, Food, F.ck [fornication or the sex drive].
ii. to ensure access to food, all humans are 'programmed' with the ability 'to kill' plus also for self-defense purposes.

As with human natures, outliers [mutations] from the majority are critical to facilitate survival of the species as well.
Being fallible and imperfect, some of these outliers [10% = 800+ million] has the wrong wirings and got perverted, psychopathy and the like.
As such, the extremes of killing in wars, genocide, homicides, and other forms of violence are a perversion of the norm.

But to ensure preservation of the species, nature operate and reduce risk with reliance on large numbers.

In addition, to counter the above all humans are also programmed with the moral potential [unfolding slowly at present]. Note this evolving trend:
The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined is a 2011 book by Steven Pinker, in which the author argues that violence in the world has declined both in the long run and in the short run and suggests explanations as to why this has occurred.[1] The book uses data documenting declining violence across time and geography. This paints a picture of massive declines in the violence of all forms, from war, to improved treatment of children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bette ... Our_Nature

It is evident despite WW I and II plus so many wars, plagues, pandemics, catastrophe since humans emerged, the human population has exploded thus securing the survival of the human species as programmed teleonomically.
There is a nuance point to the above [separate subject], but the main point here is, it counters your view that there is a contradiction to my thesis.

I'm amazed that AI can spout illogical nonsense like this. One would think logic would be AI's forte. For example:

, "teleonomic preservation of the species" is a way of describing the fundamental, non-conscious purpose that drives all life: to pass on genetic material to the next generation and ensure the long-term continuation of the lineage.

Genetic material is passed from one generation to the next -- but that has nothing to do with the "preservation of the species". IN fact, species often fail to be "preserved", even when the genetic material is passed on. Instead, living beings "evolve". If certain genes are passed on with greater frequency than others, species may very well evolve into different species. Indeed, preserving the species is probably often genetically disadvantageous. Brown bears living in the arctic evolve into polar bears as distinct foot-size, coloration, etc. become more advantageous. Eventually, they become a separate species.

Also, how do genes "program" people? Are they sitting at tiny mini-computers writing programs? Behavior is always a complicated interaction between learned behavior (which could not occur if we had no brains) and supposedly "innate" drives or abilities. "Instinct" is a meaningless term that means nothing more than "we don't understand why this behavior occurs, so we' call it 'instinct'." There is variety in even such seemingly genetically advantageous "instincts" as sex. Some people are homosexual. Some prefer anal sex or oral sex. Hmmm. That doesn't seem very well "programmed". Fire the genes! They're shirking their responsibility as programmers!

[LuckyR]

I've couldn't say it any clearer mate, what fears of living? I can't help you if you won't help yourself. And you won't.

popeye and I were discussing that those who are suffering can see death as an end to that suffering, thus putting continued life as an obstacle to that release. Thus whereas many close and not so close to death may fear death, these suffering folks, instead of fearing death, fear the absence of death.

What you are talking about, Lucky, is fear of the dying event not existential fear of ceasing to be.
Medically -assisted dying is legal in Oregon and I hope will soon become legal here in the UK. Moribund animals including of course humans often become quiescent about dying.

The distinction you're describing is an important one... for folks who believe in an afterlife. Or to put it another way, the concept of an afterlife is a "workaround" to separate death (of the body) from ceasing to exist. But for those who don't count on an afterlife, death equates to "ceasing to be".

[popeye1945]

popeye and I were discussing that those who are suffering can see death as an end to that suffering, thus putting continued life as an obstacle to that release. Thus whereas many close and not so close to death may fear death, these suffering folks, instead of fearing death, fear the absence of death.

What you are talking about, Lucky, is fear of the dying event not existential fear of ceasing to be.
Medically -assisted dying is legal in Oregon and I hope will soon become legal here in the UK. Moribund animals including of course humans often become quiescent about dying.

The distinction you're describing is an important one... for folks who believe in an afterlife. Or to put it another way, the concept of an afterlife is a "workaround" to separate death (of the body) from ceasing to exist. But for those who don't count on an afterlife, death equates to "ceasing to be".

I wonder if it would help people deal with their deaths if they had a different idea of what they themselves were as a temporal manifestation of a chemical pattern. As a link in a relatively immortal pattern of anonymity that only gains a sense of identity from the trials and tribulations of being defined by their environmental context. All we have is each other in our temporal existence. All organisms are a pure constitution in many forms, with but one essence, which we call life.

[Belinda]

popeye and I were discussing that those who are suffering can see death as an end to that suffering, thus putting continued life as an obstacle to that release. Thus whereas many close and not so close to death may fear death, these suffering folks, instead of fearing death, fear the absence of death.

What you are talking about, Lucky, is fear of the dying event not existential fear of ceasing to be.
Medically -assisted dying is legal in Oregon and I hope will soon become legal here in the UK. Moribund animals including of course humans often become quiescent about dying.

The distinction you're describing is an important one... for folks who believe in an afterlife. Or to put it another way, the concept of an afterlife is a "workaround" to separate death (of the body) from ceasing to exist. But for those who don't count on an afterlife, death equates to "ceasing to be".

I'm a bit suspicious about belief in afterlife.

Buddhists who believe in reincarnation believe in Karma which decides whether you will reincarnate as a sewer rat or a king. Heaven, hell, and karma are all social control devices.

Religions come with sweeteners such as fellowship during trouble and joy , and they also serve social control.