I was recently accused of - or rather
labeled as - being stone cold and insensitive to the feelings of
other people. This label stemmed from my rather blase reaction to the
news of the untimely demise of some acquaintance. Not only was the
acquaintanceship rather abstruse, but it was tenuous at best. So, was
it wrong of me to not immediately commiserate with someone when they
shared the news of a third party either dying or being diagnosed with
some terminal illness. There is nothing that can be done to mitigate
the impact of someone's death, but there are many opportunities to
ameliorate a terminal illness. My natural reaction is to find out
what options are available to the affected person. I want to know
what choices the person is making. I want to know how high their
chances are of beating the illness. This is the line of processing
information that has led to me being accused of callousness and
insensitivity to the feelings of others. I am always amazed by
people's reactions when they hear of someone being diagnosed with a
terminal disease. I have seen grown folks break down, cry, get
depressed, start mourning, and generally express disappointment at
the unfairness of life. In most cases, people start acting as if the
person has already died. I find all this carrying on, unnecessary
hand wringing, and endless sympathizing rather morbid (pun
unintended). It's as if folks become blind and switch off their
brains at the slightest hint of bad news. They, then, fail to
contemplate the possibilities offered by medical science, I mean,
there is always the hope for a full recovery.
I, on the other hand, am instinctively
optimistic which is why I always consider there being a possible
modern medical intervention. I research the chances the person has of
beating the odds and surviving the illness. I take the inductive
reasoning approach and am all in to getting a second, a third, and
even a fourth opinion. Humanity has progressed and made so many
advances in the medical field that it is always possible to medically
assuage any terminal illness. I never take the sympathy route – I
think sympathy only further exacerbates the introversion and shock a
person feels at a time when they are being forced to confront their
own mortality. I think that sympathy only serves to further mask the
true emotions in such situations. Introversion effectively mutes the
body's ability to naturally fight back against disease. Sympathy is
only good, I believe, when used as an initial coping mechanism to
soften the blow of the enervating news. I believe that empathy, in
the long run, is a much better action as it forces a person to
identify and understand the other person's feelings and difficulties.
Ergo, empathy forces us to directly and immediately confront the
issues surrounding the difficulty or illness.
Look, sympathy has its place and uses
in life but, it is a weak reaction as it tackles life at a distance.
It is natural to sympathize with the victims of a natural disaster –
I mean, your emotional engagement is at arm's length. We shake our
heads and express shock at the amount of damage ..., but this does
not affect the general and smooth rhythm of our own lives. It becomes
a talking point around the cooler before we have to rush off to the
next meeting. However, if the disaster directly affects a person or a
family member – if all they have left are the clothes on their
backs – we are more prone to act in a meaningful manner beyond the
pithy 'in our prayers, in our thoughts' mantra. If a disaster
directly affects a person, the more likely they are to get involved
in rebuilding and recovery efforts. This illustration attempts to
show that there is a real dichotomy in the emotional mechanics of the
two actions. There is an extended explanation here
Empathy_vs_Sympathy
I think that sympathy as a social
convention is detrimental to how effectively people deal with
difficult issues like death, natural disasters, and terminal
illnesses. Sympathy is one of the reasons why society has its
collective head in the sand regarding death. I believe that only a
minority of people have confronted their own mortality. The rest of
modern society is focused on avoiding the inevitable by attempting to
prolong life, maturity, and youth. There is no need for further
explanation except to highlight that the cosmetics, pharmaceuticals –
including the vitamin and supplement industries – are trillion
dollar businesses. This is a concerted effort to avoid one of the
only two certainties which are consistent across all life forms –
birth and death. Merely confronting one's own demise and the whole
end of life process is an almost taboo subject reserved for the
elderly and terminally ill. That is such a philosophical travesty as
I feel that the sooner in life mortality is confronted, the higher
quality of life a person is able to lead. It really is as simple as
acknowledging that death is inevitable and then living a full life –
the old saw of living a life without regrets. I think we have become
accustomed to approaching life as if we are immortal, that we
postpone certain milestones until well into the end of life process;
The proverbial bucket list and its insufferable time crunch. The
better approach is to do as much as quickly as possible before the
end of life process puts the squeeze on your time. The only time I
truly feel saddened is when some poor soul is unable to complete
their bucket list due to a violent, accidental death. I must qualify
that statement somewhat, as I do not feel for the perpetrators of
violent deaths, rather I feel for their innocent victims. So, drunk
drivers, suicide bombers, murderers, rapists, and ilk of that nature
– I never feel sorry for their deaths. I empathize with both the
victims' families and the perpetrators' families as they both suffer
the loss of a loved one. These are all difficult issues to tackle and
I believe they should be a part of our daily conversations. The best
way to consider this process is to empathize, you know, to put
yourself in the shoes of those affected by either a terminal illness
or a violent death. Most of the choices at the end of life process
are best viewed through the prism of the choices dictated by the
philosophical parameters that most resonate with the affected
individual.
The most common solution of choice is
religious. I am yet to conceptually understand the whole notion of
either sending or keeping in prayer the victims of natural disasters.
How does it make sense to get on your knees and talk to the woman in
the clouds while your neighbors have lost all their possessions? It
might make you feel better, but it does absolutely nothing for the
affected people. This is simply an indictment of the pervasive nature
of religious thought. It is unfortunate that it still has such
control over many aspects of modern life. Religion, in all its
iterations, is still the opiate of the masses as it offers the hope
of a future existence beyond death in some imaginary paradise.
Religion, as a control mechanism, demands that its adherents not
directly confront life but stake their faith (pun intended) on
solutions from on high. The most insidious aspect of religion is the
underlying belief in the concept of some form of reincarnation;
whereby, not only families, but whole societies coalesce around the
possibility of reuniting at some point in the future in some
imaginary place. Thus, a lot of time is needlessly expended on
meditation and prayers to an imaginary woman in the sky – this is
simply, but stupidly, betting the farm on the hopes of some
post-death delayed gratification. In my case, I abide by the
hedonistic principles of existence – give me my pleasure now as the
future is not guaranteed but will take care of itself. I have been
asked if I would not like to spend eternity with my family and
friends in the next life. Well, firstly let me fully enjoy this
current life as I might not want to spend eternity with some of the
people that I have met. Secondly, what happens after I die will take
care of itself and there is certainly nothing I can do about it
during this lifetime. The essayist William Hazlitt (1778 – 1830)
said it best when he wrote that:
Perhaps
the best cure for the fear of death is to reflect that life has a
beginning as well as an end. There was a time when you were not: that
gives us no concern. Why then should it trouble us that a time will
come when we shall cease to be? To die is only to be as we were
before we were born.
How, then, would I handle life if I
were to be hit with the 'terminal illness' label. As I intimated
earlier on, I would be searching for other medical opinions as well
as considering unorthodox methods to combat whatever the terminal
illness might be. I would stake my survival on medical science and if
that failed to cure my malady, then I would be actively engaged in my
own end of life process. I would refuse all offers of prayers as I
would find all that religious mumbo-jumbo a mere annoyance and more
of an insult. If my family and friends wish to pray – they would be
free to do so in the their own time. I would keep copies of the
various studies done by several medical schools and hospitals on the
inefficacy of prayer – just as a rude reminder. I would prefer they
visit with me, so we can talk of our shared human experience. Nothing
would please me more than to just sit and shoot the breeze, reminisce
on some past escapades and times without getting either too nostalgic
or overly sentimental. I would enjoy discussing the meaning of life,
the purpose of life, the dying process, and death. Anything else will
not only introvert me, but will make me absolutely miserable. A
better use of my time would be to discuss issues that deal with
quality of life (Nicomachean
Ethics anyone?) rather than
spending my time listening to others talking to themselves in
prayer to some unresponsive entity. This is the prism that dictates
the philosophical parameters of my decision making process. I think
each person has their own unique philosophical process. There are
some shared common strategies for a higher quality of life and the
secret is to find and apply them to your life. Some of these
strategies are encapsulated in famous poems like Marianne
Williamson's Our
Greatest Fear ; some are contained in the words of a remixed
song, from the turn of the century, that exhorts you to Wear
Sunscreen ; or in the words on a sandwich board:
This
is your life. Do what you love and do it often.
If
you don't like something, CHANGE IT.
If
you don't like your job, QUIT.
If
you do not have enough time, STOP WATCHING TV.
If
you are looking for the love of your life, STOP; They will be waiting
for you when you start doing things you love.
STOP
over analyzing, all emotions are beautiful. LIFE IS SIMPLE.
When
you eat, appreciate every last bite.
OPEN
your mind, arms, and heart to new things and people, we are united in
our differences.
Ask
the next person you see what their passion is, and SHARE your
inspiring DREAM with them.
TRAVEL
often; getting lost will help you FIND yourself.
Some
opportunities only come once, SEIZE them.
Life
is about the people you meet, and the things you create with them.
So, go out and START CREATING.
Life
is short. LIVE YOUR DREAM AND SHARE YOUR PASSION. (Anonymous)
Live your live – Have fun always!!
No comments:
Post a Comment